常规聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯和微晶纤维素增强聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯表面粗糙度和冲击强度的体外比较研究。

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Thumma Sagar Reddy, Vinu Thomas George, Gauri Shahi, Sauptik Ray
{"title":"常规聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯和微晶纤维素增强聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯表面粗糙度和冲击强度的体外比较研究。","authors":"Thumma Sagar Reddy, Vinu Thomas George, Gauri Shahi, Sauptik Ray","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_459_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate and compare the surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) with microcrystalline cellulose (MCC)-reinforced PMMA.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>An in-vitro experimental study was conducted. Fifty PMMA specimens were fabricated and divided into five groups based on MCC concentration (2% or 5%) and particle size (20 μm or 50 μm).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Specimens (80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm) were categorized as follows: Group A (control; conventional PMMA), Groups B and D (2% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively), and Groups C and E (5% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively). Surface roughness was measured using a contact profilometer, and impact strength was tested with a ZwickRoell impact testing machine.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 28.0. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test was used to determine intergroup differences, with the significance level set at p<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface roughness was lower in Groups B (0.89±0.43), C (1.07±0.34), and E (0.77±0.27) compared to the control Group A (1.25±0.42), while Group D (1.84±0.25) showed higher values. Impact strength in Groups C (1.85±0.23), D (1.80±0.17), and E (1.81±0.26) was slightly lower than the control (1.88±0.31), though not statistically significant. However, Group B (1.56 ± 0.20) showed a significant reduction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The addition of 20 μm MCC reduced surface roughness at both 2% and 5% concentrations, whereas 50 μm MCC increased roughness at 2% but decreased at 5%. Impact strength remained comparable to the control in all groups except PMMA + 2% MCC (20 μm), which exhibited a significant decline. MCC reinforcement influences PMMA's mechanical and surface properties, suggesting its potential for denture base modifications.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"25 3","pages":"204-209"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12370108/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate and microcrystalline cellulose reinforced polymethyl methacrylate - An in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Thumma Sagar Reddy, Vinu Thomas George, Gauri Shahi, Sauptik Ray\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jips.jips_459_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate and compare the surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) with microcrystalline cellulose (MCC)-reinforced PMMA.</p><p><strong>Settings and design: </strong>An in-vitro experimental study was conducted. Fifty PMMA specimens were fabricated and divided into five groups based on MCC concentration (2% or 5%) and particle size (20 μm or 50 μm).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Specimens (80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm) were categorized as follows: Group A (control; conventional PMMA), Groups B and D (2% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively), and Groups C and E (5% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively). Surface roughness was measured using a contact profilometer, and impact strength was tested with a ZwickRoell impact testing machine.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 28.0. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test was used to determine intergroup differences, with the significance level set at p<0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface roughness was lower in Groups B (0.89±0.43), C (1.07±0.34), and E (0.77±0.27) compared to the control Group A (1.25±0.42), while Group D (1.84±0.25) showed higher values. Impact strength in Groups C (1.85±0.23), D (1.80±0.17), and E (1.81±0.26) was slightly lower than the control (1.88±0.31), though not statistically significant. However, Group B (1.56 ± 0.20) showed a significant reduction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The addition of 20 μm MCC reduced surface roughness at both 2% and 5% concentrations, whereas 50 μm MCC increased roughness at 2% but decreased at 5%. Impact strength remained comparable to the control in all groups except PMMA + 2% MCC (20 μm), which exhibited a significant decline. MCC reinforcement influences PMMA's mechanical and surface properties, suggesting its potential for denture base modifications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society\",\"volume\":\"25 3\",\"pages\":\"204-209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12370108/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_459_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_459_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价和比较常规聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯(PMMA)与微晶纤维素(MCC)增强PMMA的表面粗糙度和冲击强度。设置与设计:进行体外实验研究。制作50个PMMA样品,根据MCC浓度(2%或5%)和粒径(20 μm或50 μm)分为5组。材料与方法:标本(80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm)分为:A组(对照组;B组和D组(2% MCC,颗粒分别为20µm和50µm), C组和E组(5% MCC,颗粒分别为20µm和50µm)。表面粗糙度用接触轮廓仪测量,冲击强度用ZwickRoell冲击试验机测试。采用的统计分析:采用IBM SPSS Version 28.0进行统计分析。采用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验确定组间差异,显著性水平设为:B组表面粗糙度(0.89±0.43)、C组(1.07±0.34)、E组(0.77±0.27)低于对照组A组(1.25±0.42),而D组(1.84±0.25)高于对照组。C组(1.85±0.23)、D组(1.80±0.17)、E组(1.81±0.26)的冲击强度略低于对照组(1.88±0.31),但差异无统计学意义。而B组(1.56±0.20)明显降低。结论:20 μm MCC在2%和5%浓度下均降低了表面粗糙度,而50 μm MCC在2%浓度下增加了表面粗糙度,但在5%浓度下降低了表面粗糙度。除PMMA + 2% MCC (20 μm)显著下降外,其余各组的冲击强度均与对照组相当。MCC增强会影响PMMA的机械性能和表面性能,表明其具有义齿基托修饰的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate and microcrystalline cellulose reinforced polymethyl methacrylate - An in vitro study.

Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate and microcrystalline cellulose reinforced polymethyl methacrylate - An in vitro study.

Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate and microcrystalline cellulose reinforced polymethyl methacrylate - An in vitro study.

Comparative evaluation of surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate and microcrystalline cellulose reinforced polymethyl methacrylate - An in vitro study.

Aim: To evaluate and compare the surface roughness and impact strength of conventional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) with microcrystalline cellulose (MCC)-reinforced PMMA.

Settings and design: An in-vitro experimental study was conducted. Fifty PMMA specimens were fabricated and divided into five groups based on MCC concentration (2% or 5%) and particle size (20 μm or 50 μm).

Materials and methods: Specimens (80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm) were categorized as follows: Group A (control; conventional PMMA), Groups B and D (2% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively), and Groups C and E (5% MCC with 20 µm and 50 µm particles, respectively). Surface roughness was measured using a contact profilometer, and impact strength was tested with a ZwickRoell impact testing machine.

Statistical analysis used: Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 28.0. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test was used to determine intergroup differences, with the significance level set at p<0.05.

Results: Surface roughness was lower in Groups B (0.89±0.43), C (1.07±0.34), and E (0.77±0.27) compared to the control Group A (1.25±0.42), while Group D (1.84±0.25) showed higher values. Impact strength in Groups C (1.85±0.23), D (1.80±0.17), and E (1.81±0.26) was slightly lower than the control (1.88±0.31), though not statistically significant. However, Group B (1.56 ± 0.20) showed a significant reduction.

Conclusion: The addition of 20 μm MCC reduced surface roughness at both 2% and 5% concentrations, whereas 50 μm MCC increased roughness at 2% but decreased at 5%. Impact strength remained comparable to the control in all groups except PMMA + 2% MCC (20 μm), which exhibited a significant decline. MCC reinforcement influences PMMA's mechanical and surface properties, suggesting its potential for denture base modifications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信