Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and fracture resistance of posterior restorative materials alkasite and newer glass ionomers with amalgam: An in vitro study

IF 0.5 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of International Oral Health Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.4103/jioh.jioh_95_22

Gurmeen Kaur, Chitharanjan Shetty, M. Hegde

{"title":"Comparative evaluation of compressive strength and fracture resistance of posterior restorative materials alkasite and newer glass ionomers with amalgam: An in vitro study","authors":"Gurmeen Kaur, Chitharanjan Shetty, M. Hegde","doi":"10.4103/jioh.jioh_95_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The conventional restorative materials amalgam and glass ionomer have multifarious drawbacks leading to introduction of newer materials with superior biomechanical attributes. The present study aimed to assess and compare the compressive strength of ceramic-reinforced glass ionomer cement, zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement, high strength glass ionomer posterior restorative material, alkasite restorative material, and amalgam when used as posterior restorative materials. Materials and Methods: Five restorative materials were evaluated: modified glass ionomer cements including ceramic-reinforced, zirconia-reinforced, and high strength glass ionomer; alkasite restorative material; and dental amalgam. Fifty cylindrical specimens were fabricated using test materials (n = 10 for each group). Class II cavities prepared on 50 intact permanent molars were restored with test materials. After thermocycling and 24 h of storing, the specimens in artificial saliva, compressive strength, and fracture resistance were tested. Data were analyzed statistically. One-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey test were used for intergroup comparison. Pearson’s correlation was used for correlating the maximum load by cylindrical and tooth specimens. Results: A significantly high compressive strength was displayed by specimens of group 4, followed by group 5, group 3, group 1, and least by group 2. The highest fracture resistance was displayed by teeth restored with the test materials in group 4, group 1, group 5, group 2, and least by group 3. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, alkasite restorative material (Cention N) showed the highest compressive strength in cylindrical and highest fracture resistance in tooth specimens.","PeriodicalId":16138,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Oral Health","volume":"14 1","pages":"566 - 573"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Oral Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jioh.jioh_95_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The conventional restorative materials amalgam and glass ionomer have multifarious drawbacks leading to introduction of newer materials with superior biomechanical attributes. The present study aimed to assess and compare the compressive strength of ceramic-reinforced glass ionomer cement, zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement, high strength glass ionomer posterior restorative material, alkasite restorative material, and amalgam when used as posterior restorative materials. Materials and Methods: Five restorative materials were evaluated: modified glass ionomer cements including ceramic-reinforced, zirconia-reinforced, and high strength glass ionomer; alkasite restorative material; and dental amalgam. Fifty cylindrical specimens were fabricated using test materials (n = 10 for each group). Class II cavities prepared on 50 intact permanent molars were restored with test materials. After thermocycling and 24 h of storing, the specimens in artificial saliva, compressive strength, and fracture resistance were tested. Data were analyzed statistically. One-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey test were used for intergroup comparison. Pearson’s correlation was used for correlating the maximum load by cylindrical and tooth specimens. Results: A significantly high compressive strength was displayed by specimens of group 4, followed by group 5, group 3, group 1, and least by group 2. The highest fracture resistance was displayed by teeth restored with the test materials in group 4, group 1, group 5, group 2, and least by group 3. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, alkasite restorative material (Cention N) showed the highest compressive strength in cylindrical and highest fracture resistance in tooth specimens.

查看原文本刊更多论文

含汞合金的碱性和新型玻璃离聚物对后部修复材料抗压强度和抗断裂性能的比较评价：一项体外研究

目的：传统的修复材料汞合金和玻璃离聚物具有多种缺点，导致引入了具有优异生物力学特性的新型材料。本研究旨在评估和比较陶瓷增强玻璃离聚物水泥、氧化锆增强玻璃离聚合物水泥、高强度玻璃离聚体后部修复材料、碱金属修复材料和汞合金用作后部修复材料时的抗压强度。材料和方法：评价了五种修复材料：改性玻璃离聚物水泥，包括陶瓷增强、氧化锆增强和高强度玻璃离聚体；碱土修复材料；以及牙科汞合金。使用试验材料制作了50个圆柱形试样（每组n=10）。在50颗完整的恒磨牙上制备的II类蛀牙用测试材料修复。热循环和24 储存h后，对样品在人工唾液中的抗压强度和抗断裂性能进行了测试。对数据进行统计分析。单因素方差分析和事后Tukey检验用于组间比较。Pearson相关用于关联圆柱和牙齿样本的最大载荷。结果：第4组的试样显示出显著高的抗压强度，其次是第5组、第3组、第1组，第2组的抗压强度最低。在第4组、第1组、第5组、第2组中，用测试材料修复的牙齿显示出最高的抗断裂性，而在第3组中则最低。结论：在本研究的范围内，碱金属修复材料（Cention N）在圆柱形中表现出最高的抗压强度，在牙齿标本中表现出最大的抗折性。

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 International Oral Health Dentistry-Dentistry (all)

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： It is a journal aimed for research, scientific facts and details covering all specialties of dentistry with a good determination for exploring and sharing the knowledge in the medical and dental fraternity. The scope is therefore huge covering almost all streams of dentistry - starting from original studies, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, very unique case reports. Our journal appreciates research articles pertaining with advancement of dentistry. Journal scope is not limited to these subjects and is more wider covering all specialities of dentistry follows: Preventive and Community Dentistry (Dental Public Health) Endodontics Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (also called Oral Surgery) Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics Periodontology (also called Periodontics) Pediatric Dentistry (also called Pedodontics) Prosthodontics (also called Prosthetic Dentistry) Oral Medicine Special Needs Dentistry (also called Special Care Dentistry) Oral Biology Forensic Odontology Geriatric Dentistry or Geriodontics Implantology Laser and Aesthetic Dentistry.