Srivastava Shitij, Tripathi Abhidha, Shekhar Abhinav, Chaturvedi Anshuman, Singh Abhishek, Saxena Shivansh M, Khan Rabia
Department of Prosthodontics, Sardar Patel Post Graduate Institute of Dental and Medical Sciences, Lucknow, IND.
Cureus. 2025 Jul 5;17(7):e87360. doi: 10.7759/cureus.87360. eCollection 2025 Jul.
Objectives This study set out to compare the mechanical behavior of graphene and zirconia in the context of their potential use in fixed dental prostheses. Specifically, we evaluated three critical properties: Rockwell hardness, to understand surface durability; compressive strength, to assess resistance to biting forces; and flexural strength, to examine performance under bending stress. To approximate real-world conditions, all samples were subjected to thermocycling, simulating the thermal changes typical of the oral cavity. The goal was to explore whether graphene could serve as a viable alternative to zirconia in restorative applications. Methods A systematic in vitro protocol was followed. Standardized specimens of graphene and zirconia were fabricated and subjected to 30,000 thermocycles between 5°C and 55°C. Mechanical tests were conducted using a universal testing machine. Rockwell hardness was measured using a standard durometer, while compressive and flexural strengths were evaluated through load-to-failure testing. Data were statistically analyzed using independent-sample t-tests, with significance defined at p<0.05. Results Zirconia showed markedly higher compressive strength compared to graphene, making it better suited for high-load areas of the mouth. Interestingly, the two materials performed similarly in Rockwell hardness, suggesting comparable surface durability. Flexural strength results were also close, with no significant difference, indicating that graphene may perform well under bending or tensile forces. These outcomes reaffirm zirconia's status as a robust material for prosthodontics while also opening the door for graphene as a lightweight, structurally capable alternative. Conclusion While zirconia continues to outperform in terms of compressive strength, graphene demonstrates meaningful potential due to its comparable flexural strength and hardness, along with the added advantage of being significantly lighter. These findings support further investigation into graphene's role in restorative dentistry, especially in cases where weight, design complexity, or aesthetics demand alternative materials. Future research should explore its biocompatibility, long-term performance, and integration with current dental systems.
目的 本研究旨在比较石墨烯和氧化锆在固定义齿潜在应用中的力学性能。具体而言，我们评估了三个关键性能：洛氏硬度，以了解表面耐久性；抗压强度，以评估对咬合力的抵抗力；以及抗弯强度，以检查在弯曲应力下的性能。为了模拟实际情况，所有样品都进行了热循环处理，模拟口腔典型的温度变化。目的是探讨石墨烯在修复应用中是否可以作为氧化锆的可行替代品。方法 遵循系统的体外实验方案。制备了石墨烯和氧化锆的标准化试样，并在5°C至55°C之间进行30000次热循环。使用万能试验机进行力学测试。使用标准硬度计测量洛氏硬度，而通过加载至破坏测试评估抗压强度和抗弯强度。使用独立样本t检验对数据进行统计分析，显著性定义为p<0.05。结果 与石墨烯相比，氧化锆的抗压强度明显更高，使其更适合口腔的高负荷区域。有趣的是，两种材料在洛氏硬度方面表现相似，表明表面耐久性相当。抗弯强度结果也相近，无显著差异，表明石墨烯在弯曲或拉伸力下可能表现良好。这些结果再次确认了氧化锆作为口腔修复学中一种坚固材料的地位，同时也为石墨烯作为一种轻质、具有结构性能的替代品打开了大门。结论 虽然氧化锆在抗压强度方面继续表现出色，但石墨烯因其相当的抗弯强度和硬度，以及显著更轻的额外优势，显示出有意义的潜力。这些发现支持进一步研究石墨烯在修复牙科中的作用，特别是在重量、设计复杂性或美学要求使用替代材料的情况下。未来的研究应探索其生物相容性、长期性能以及与当前牙科系统的整合。
