Airin Karelys Avendaño Rondón, Maribí Isomar Terán Lozada, Priscilla Barbosa Ferreira Soares, Luis Henrique Araujo Raposo, Carlos José Soares
{"title":"不同材料的传统和3d打印模型对乙烯-醋酸乙烯酯用于制造定制牙套的机械性能的影响。","authors":"Airin Karelys Avendaño Rondón, Maribí Isomar Terán Lozada, Priscilla Barbosa Ferreira Soares, Luis Henrique Araujo Raposo, Carlos José Soares","doi":"10.1111/edt.12912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background/Aim</h3>\n \n <p>The interaction between the ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) with distinct materials utilized for obtaining dental models can affect the performance of resulting mouthguards. This study attempted to evaluate the effect of different materials for conventional (dental stone) or 3D-printed (resin) models on EVA's physical and mechanical properties and surface characteristics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>EVA sheets (Bioart) were laminated over four model types: GIV, conventional Type IV dental stone model (Zhermak); ReG, resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone model (Zero Stone); 3DnT, 3D resin printed model (Anycubic) without surface treatment; 3DT, 3D-printed model (Anycubic) with water-soluble gel (KY Jelly Lubricant, Johnson & Johnson) coating during post-curing process. The EVA specimens were cut following the ISO 37-II standard (<i>n</i> = 30). Shore A hardness was measured before and after plasticization on the contact (internal) or opposite (external) surfaces with the model. The breaking force (F, N), elongation (EL, mm), and ultimate tensile strength (UTS, MPa) were measured using a universal testing machine. Macro-photography and scanning electron microscopy were adopted for classifying the EVA surface alteration. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with repeated measures, followed by Tukey's test (<i>α</i> = .05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Plasticization significantly decreased Shore A values for the tested EVA regardless of the model type (<i>p</i> < .001). Higher F, El, and UTS values were verified for the EVA with 3DT and GIV models compared to ReG and 3DnT (<i>p</i> < .001). 3DnT models resulted in severe surface alteration and a greater reduction of the mechanical properties of the EVA.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The interaction of EVA with 3D resin-printed models without surface treatment or resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone models significantly affected the physical and mechanical properties of this material. The utilization of water-soluble gel coating during the post-curing process of 3D resin printed models improved the mechanical properties of the EVA, similarly when this material was plasticized over conventional Type IV dental stone model.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of different materials for conventional and 3D-printed models on the mechanical properties of ethylene-vinyl acetate utilized for fabricating custom-fit mouthguards\",\"authors\":\"Airin Karelys Avendaño Rondón, Maribí Isomar Terán Lozada, Priscilla Barbosa Ferreira Soares, Luis Henrique Araujo Raposo, Carlos José Soares\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/edt.12912\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background/Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>The interaction between the ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) with distinct materials utilized for obtaining dental models can affect the performance of resulting mouthguards. This study attempted to evaluate the effect of different materials for conventional (dental stone) or 3D-printed (resin) models on EVA's physical and mechanical properties and surface characteristics.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>EVA sheets (Bioart) were laminated over four model types: GIV, conventional Type IV dental stone model (Zhermak); ReG, resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone model (Zero Stone); 3DnT, 3D resin printed model (Anycubic) without surface treatment; 3DT, 3D-printed model (Anycubic) with water-soluble gel (KY Jelly Lubricant, Johnson & Johnson) coating during post-curing process. The EVA specimens were cut following the ISO 37-II standard (<i>n</i> = 30). Shore A hardness was measured before and after plasticization on the contact (internal) or opposite (external) surfaces with the model. The breaking force (F, N), elongation (EL, mm), and ultimate tensile strength (UTS, MPa) were measured using a universal testing machine. Macro-photography and scanning electron microscopy were adopted for classifying the EVA surface alteration. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with repeated measures, followed by Tukey's test (<i>α</i> = .05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Plasticization significantly decreased Shore A values for the tested EVA regardless of the model type (<i>p</i> < .001). Higher F, El, and UTS values were verified for the EVA with 3DT and GIV models compared to ReG and 3DnT (<i>p</i> < .001). 3DnT models resulted in severe surface alteration and a greater reduction of the mechanical properties of the EVA.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The interaction of EVA with 3D resin-printed models without surface treatment or resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone models significantly affected the physical and mechanical properties of this material. The utilization of water-soluble gel coating during the post-curing process of 3D resin printed models improved the mechanical properties of the EVA, similarly when this material was plasticized over conventional Type IV dental stone model.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/edt.12912\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/edt.12912","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of different materials for conventional and 3D-printed models on the mechanical properties of ethylene-vinyl acetate utilized for fabricating custom-fit mouthguards
Background/Aim
The interaction between the ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) with distinct materials utilized for obtaining dental models can affect the performance of resulting mouthguards. This study attempted to evaluate the effect of different materials for conventional (dental stone) or 3D-printed (resin) models on EVA's physical and mechanical properties and surface characteristics.
Material and Methods
EVA sheets (Bioart) were laminated over four model types: GIV, conventional Type IV dental stone model (Zhermak); ReG, resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone model (Zero Stone); 3DnT, 3D resin printed model (Anycubic) without surface treatment; 3DT, 3D-printed model (Anycubic) with water-soluble gel (KY Jelly Lubricant, Johnson & Johnson) coating during post-curing process. The EVA specimens were cut following the ISO 37-II standard (n = 30). Shore A hardness was measured before and after plasticization on the contact (internal) or opposite (external) surfaces with the model. The breaking force (F, N), elongation (EL, mm), and ultimate tensile strength (UTS, MPa) were measured using a universal testing machine. Macro-photography and scanning electron microscopy were adopted for classifying the EVA surface alteration. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with repeated measures, followed by Tukey's test (α = .05).
Results
Plasticization significantly decreased Shore A values for the tested EVA regardless of the model type (p < .001). Higher F, El, and UTS values were verified for the EVA with 3DT and GIV models compared to ReG and 3DnT (p < .001). 3DnT models resulted in severe surface alteration and a greater reduction of the mechanical properties of the EVA.
Conclusion
The interaction of EVA with 3D resin-printed models without surface treatment or resin-reinforced Type IV dental stone models significantly affected the physical and mechanical properties of this material. The utilization of water-soluble gel coating during the post-curing process of 3D resin printed models improved the mechanical properties of the EVA, similarly when this material was plasticized over conventional Type IV dental stone model.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
