Tayebi Golnaz, Omidian Sajjad, Abtahi Sara, Ranjbar Hassani Alireza, Sherafatmand Yasaman
Department of Dental Biomaterials, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Biomaterials, Faculty of Biomedical Engineering (Center of Excellence), Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran.
Front Dent. 2024 Nov 6;21:43. doi: 10.18502/fid.v21i43.16849. eCollection 2024.
Assessment of mechanical properties of composite resins is important since they can affect the clinical performance and longevity of restorations. This study aimed to assess and compare different properties of dental composite resins available in the market. In this comparative study, samples of four different dental composite resins (Edge COM, Saremco, FGM, and Kulzer) were tested according to ISO 4049:2019 guidelines. Flexural strength (by using a universal testing machine), depth of cure (using the ISO 4049 scrape technique), radiopacity (with aluminum step wedge), water sorption/solubility (by using immersion and drying cycles), and shade (by using Vita Easy Shade) of the samples were assessed. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test (alpha=0.05). No significant difference was found in flexural strength among the four groups (P>0.05). The depth of cure of FGM was significantly higher than that of other groups (P<0.05). Solubility and water sorption were the highest in Kulzer, and the lowest in Edge COM (P<0.05). All tested composites met the necessary radiopacity standards for precise radiographic diagnosis; radiopacity was higher in Saremco and FGM groups. None of the composite resins matched the reference A2 shade. Although no significant difference was found in flexural strength of the tested composites, they had differences in other properties. Edge COM exhibited high flexural strength, while Saremco had optimal radiopacity.
评估复合树脂的机械性能很重要，因为它们会影响修复体的临床性能和使用寿命。本研究旨在评估和比较市场上不同牙科复合树脂的性能。在这项比较研究中，根据ISO 4049:2019指南对四种不同牙科复合树脂（Edge COM、Saremco、FGM和Kulzer）的样本进行了测试。评估了样本的弯曲强度（使用万能试验机）、固化深度（使用ISO 4049刮擦技术）、射线不透性（使用铝阶梯楔形块）、吸水性/溶解性（使用浸泡和干燥循环）以及颜色（使用Vita Easy Shade）。数据通过单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验（α = 0.05）进行分析。四组之间的弯曲强度没有显著差异（P>0.05）。FGM的固化深度显著高于其他组（P<0.05）。Kulzer的溶解性和吸水性最高，Edge COM最低（P<0.05）。所有测试的复合材料均符合精确放射诊断所需的射线不透性标准；Saremco和FGM组的射线不透性较高。没有一种复合树脂与参考A2色匹配。尽管测试的复合材料在弯曲强度上没有显著差异，但它们在其他性能上存在差异。Edge COM表现出较高的弯曲强度，而Saremco具有最佳的射线不透性。
