Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites.

Q3 Dentistry
Fateme Azizi, Fariba Ezoji, Soraya Khafri, Behnaz Esmaeili
{"title":"Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites.","authors":"Fateme Azizi,&nbsp;Fariba Ezoji,&nbsp;Soraya Khafri,&nbsp;Behnaz Esmaeili","doi":"10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> In this in vitro study, 50 composite specimens were prepared in brass molds with 10mm ×10mm ×2mm and divided into five groups (n=10). Specimens included three conventional flowable composites (Grandio flow, Filtek flow and Admira fusion flow), one self-adhering flowable composite (SAF, Vertise flow) and a microhybrid composite (filtek z250). After polishing, the micro-hardness of the specimens was measured in a Vickers hardness device, and the specimens were then subjected to 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000, 80000 and 120000 wear cycles in a wear tester. One-way ANOVA/Games-Howell, Kruskal Wallis, and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at P<0.05. <b>Results:</b> The surface micro-hardness of the SAF was significantly lower than that of the microhybrid composite (P=0.01). There was no significant difference between the surface hardness of the different tested flowable composites (P>0.05). Also, the wear resistance of the studied composites was not significantly different in various cycles (P>0.05). <b>Conclusion:</b> Based on our results, SAF would not be an ideal substitute for conventional flowable composites in high-stress areas.</p>","PeriodicalId":12445,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Dentistry","volume":"20 ","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9e/e6/FID-20-10.PMC10258403.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 50 composite specimens were prepared in brass molds with 10mm ×10mm ×2mm and divided into five groups (n=10). Specimens included three conventional flowable composites (Grandio flow, Filtek flow and Admira fusion flow), one self-adhering flowable composite (SAF, Vertise flow) and a microhybrid composite (filtek z250). After polishing, the micro-hardness of the specimens was measured in a Vickers hardness device, and the specimens were then subjected to 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000, 80000 and 120000 wear cycles in a wear tester. One-way ANOVA/Games-Howell, Kruskal Wallis, and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at P<0.05. Results: The surface micro-hardness of the SAF was significantly lower than that of the microhybrid composite (P=0.01). There was no significant difference between the surface hardness of the different tested flowable composites (P>0.05). Also, the wear resistance of the studied composites was not significantly different in various cycles (P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on our results, SAF would not be an ideal substitute for conventional flowable composites in high-stress areas.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

自粘可流动复合材料与常规可流动复合材料的表面显微硬度和耐磨性比较。
目的:复合材料的力学性能直接影响复合材料修复体的耐久性。本研究的目的是评估自粘流动复合材料(SAF)的硬度和耐磨性,并与常规流动复合材料进行比较。材料与方法:在体外研究中,在10mm ×10mm ×2mm黄铜模具中制备50个复合试样,分为5组(n=10)。样品包括三种常规流动复合材料(Grandio流、Filtek流和Admira融合流)、一种自粘流动复合材料(SAF、Vertise流)和一种微混合复合材料(Filtek z250)。抛光后,在维氏硬度仪中测量试样的显微硬度,然后在磨损试验机中进行5000、10000、20000、40000、80000和120000次磨损循环。采用单因素方差分析/Games-Howell、Kruskal Wallis和Friedman检验进行统计分析。结果:SAF表面显微硬度显著低于微杂化复合材料(P=0.01)。不同可流动复合材料的表面硬度差异不显著(P>0.05)。复合材料的耐磨性在不同循环过程中无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:基于我们的研究结果,SAF并不是传统流动复合材料在高应力区域的理想替代品。
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
Frontiers in Dentistry
Frontiers in Dentistry Dentistry-General Dentistry
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信