In Vitro Analysis of Compressive Strength of Three Different Aesthetic Restorative Materials.

IF 0.7 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-10 DOI:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1884_24

Rohit Nagar, Simone Grandini, Carlo Gaeta, Sumit Dubey, Niladri Maiti, Madhura Avinash Jadhav, Neerieza Konthoujam

{"title":"In Vitro Analysis of Compressive Strength of Three Different Aesthetic Restorative Materials.","authors":"Rohit Nagar, Simone Grandini, Carlo Gaeta, Sumit Dubey, Niladri Maiti, Madhura Avinash Jadhav, Neerieza Konthoujam","doi":"10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1884_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The study aims to assess and contrast the compressive strengths of three aesthetically pleasing restorative materials.Materials and methods: Using metallic molds, 30 pellets were created, then split into 3 groups of 10, each meeting the required specifications. Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) cylindrical specimens are in Group A; Resin Modified GIC (RMGIC) cylindrical specimens are in Group B; and Zirconomer cylindrical specimens are in Group C. A universal testing equipment was used to compress all of the samples, and the results were acquired. Tukey's post hoc test and one-way ANOVA were used for statistical analysis.Result: Zirconomer's compressive strength is significantly higher than that of RMGIC and GIC.Conclusion: The compressive strength of Zirconomer is the highest. As a result, Zirconomer may be the preferred material for aesthetic restorative procedures.","PeriodicalId":94339,"journal":{"name":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","volume":"17 Suppl 1","pages":"S391-S393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12156493/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1884_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The study aims to assess and contrast the compressive strengths of three aesthetically pleasing restorative materials.

Materials and methods: Using metallic molds, 30 pellets were created, then split into 3 groups of 10, each meeting the required specifications. Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) cylindrical specimens are in Group A; Resin Modified GIC (RMGIC) cylindrical specimens are in Group B; and Zirconomer cylindrical specimens are in Group C. A universal testing equipment was used to compress all of the samples, and the results were acquired. Tukey's post hoc test and one-way ANOVA were used for statistical analysis.

Result: Zirconomer's compressive strength is significantly higher than that of RMGIC and GIC.

Conclusion: The compressive strength of Zirconomer is the highest. As a result, Zirconomer may be the preferred material for aesthetic restorative procedures.

查看原文本刊更多论文

三种不同美学修复材料抗压强度的体外分析。

目的：评价和对比三种美观的修复材料的抗压强度。材料和方法：使用金属模具制造30个颗粒，然后分成3组，每组10个，每组满足所需的规格。玻璃离子水泥（GIC）圆柱形试样为A组；树脂改性GIC （RMGIC）圆柱形试样为B组；c组为锆合金圆柱形试样，采用通用测试设备对所有试样进行压缩，得到结果。采用Tukey事后检验和单因素方差分析进行统计分析。结果：锆合金的抗压强度明显高于RMGIC和GIC。结论：锆合金的抗压强度最高。因此，锆合金可能是美学修复手术的首选材料。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量