Mitwalli Heba A, Baras Bashayer H, Saeed Sara S, Xu Hockin H K, Weir Michael D
Department of Restorative Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.
College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Dent J. 2024 Jan;36(1):99-104. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.11.024. Epub 2023 Nov 28.
A major drawback of resin composites is their tendency to accumulate microbial biofilms that can lead to secondary caries. The objective of this study was to compare the mechanical properties and the degree of conversion of commercial resin-based composite materials containing a contact-killing antibacterial agent, dimethylaminohexadecyl methacrylate (DMAHDM), at different concentrations, with a fluoride-releasing composite material.
Four groups were tested: Tetric N Ceram composite material (G1), Tetric Evo Ceram (G2), and Tetric N Ceram with the addition of contact-killing antibacterial agent DMAHDM at concentrations of 3% (G3) and 5% (G4). The mechanical properties, including flexural strength, elastic modulus, and Vickers microhardness and the degree of conversion were investigated.
Adding 3 % and 5 % DMAHDM resulted in flexural strength values that were comparable to Tetric Evo Ceram. Tetric N Ceram was comparable to the group containing 3 % DMAHDM (p > 0.05). However, it was significantly greater when compared to Tetric Evo Ceram (93.3 ± 9.4) and 5 % DMAHDM (p < 0.05). Both the elastic modulus and Vickers microhardness values of Tetric N Ceram were significantly higher than those of the other groups (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the elastic modulus of Tetric Evo Ceram showed similar results to groups with 3 % and 5 % DMAHDM. Nevertheless, the Vickers microhardness value is significantly higher when compared to 5 % DMAHDM (0.394 ± 0.021) (p < 0.05) while it was comparable to that of 3 % DMAHDM (0.484 ± 0.016) (p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the degree of conversion between the groups (p > 0.05).
Adding 3% DMAHDM to Tetric N Ceram resulted in flexural strength values that were similar to those of Tetric N Ceram and Tetric Evo Ceram. DMAHDM did not affect the degree of conversion of Tetric N Ceram composite.
树脂复合材料的一个主要缺点是它们容易积累微生物生物膜，这可能导致继发龋。本研究的目的是比较含有接触杀灭型抗菌剂甲基丙烯酸十六烷基二甲胺（DMAHDM）的不同浓度商业树脂基复合材料与含氟复合材料的力学性能和转化率。
测试四组材料：Tetric N Ceram复合材料（G1）、Tetric Evo Ceram（G2）以及添加浓度为3%（G3）和5%（G4）的接触杀灭型抗菌剂DMAHDM的Tetric N Ceram。研究了其力学性能，包括弯曲强度、弹性模量、维氏显微硬度以及转化率。
添加3%和5%的DMAHDM后弯曲强度值与Tetric Evo Ceram相当。Tetric N Ceram与含3% DMAHDM的组相当（p>0.05）。然而，与Tetric Evo Ceram（93.3±9.4）和5% DMAHDM相比，其显著更高（p<0.05）。Tetric N Ceram的弹性模量和维氏显微硬度值均显著高于其他组（p<0.05）。此外，Tetric Evo Ceram的弹性模量与含3%和5% DMAHDM的组结果相似。然而，与5% DMAHDM（0.394±0.021）相比，其维氏显微硬度值显著更高（p<0.05），而与3% DMAHDM（0.484±0.016）相当（p>0.05）。各组之间的转化率无统计学显著差异（p>0.05）。
向Tetric N Ceram中添加3%的DMAHDM后弯曲强度值与Tetric N Ceram和Tetric Evo Ceram相似。DMAHDM不影响Tetric N Ceram复合材料的转化率。
