{"title":"不同含量树脂材料表面粗糙度的评价","authors":"Turan Servi, T. Kölüş","doi":"10.5577/intdentres.474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the roughness level of the surfaces of polymerized temporary acrylic resin, standard 3D resin, temporary 3D resin materials with polished and unpolished conditions.\nMethodology: Thirty samples of 1 cm diameter and 5 mm height cylinders of temporary 3D resin (Alias C & B Temp, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) and standard 3D resin (Alias Sharp & Rigid, Dokuz Kimya, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) were produced with 3D printer (Photon Mono X, Anycubic). Residual resins were cleaned in Wash & Cure Plus (Anycubic) device using isopropyl alcohol and kept under UV light for 10 minutes in the same device to fully polymerize. Self-curing temporary acrylic resin (Imident, Imicryl, Konya, Türkiye) was prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions and 30 samples were prepared by transferring them to moulds of the same size. Half of the samples in each material were polished for 90 seconds with the same dentist using polishing paste (Universal Polishing Paste, Ivoclar Vivadent) (n=15). The surface of each sample was measured three times with a 120˚ angle difference using a profilometer (SJ-201, Mitutoyo, Kanagawa, Japan) and the average was taken. Levene test, t test, two-way ANOVA and Tukey test were used for statistical analysis. A p-value less than 0.05 was accepted for statistical significance.\nResults: Roughness values 1.9173±0.25078 Ra in the Unpolished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.2807±0.13317 Ra in the Polished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.7760±0.17175 Ra in the Unpolished Standard 3B Resin group, 0 in the Polished Standard 3D Resin group It was found to be 0.1887±0.08340 Ra, 2.4827±0.79651 Ra in the Unpolished Cold Acryl group, and 0.6307±0.22118 Ra in the Polished Cold Acryl group.\nConclusion: The roughness of 3D printed materials is lower than that of conventional temporary acrylic resin and polishing significantly reduced roughness in all groups.\n \nHow to cite this article: \nServi T, Kölüş T. Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents. Int Dent Res 2022;12(Suppl.1):120-3 https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474\n \nLinguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.","PeriodicalId":31322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents\",\"authors\":\"Turan Servi, T. Kölüş\",\"doi\":\"10.5577/intdentres.474\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the roughness level of the surfaces of polymerized temporary acrylic resin, standard 3D resin, temporary 3D resin materials with polished and unpolished conditions.\\nMethodology: Thirty samples of 1 cm diameter and 5 mm height cylinders of temporary 3D resin (Alias C & B Temp, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) and standard 3D resin (Alias Sharp & Rigid, Dokuz Kimya, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) were produced with 3D printer (Photon Mono X, Anycubic). Residual resins were cleaned in Wash & Cure Plus (Anycubic) device using isopropyl alcohol and kept under UV light for 10 minutes in the same device to fully polymerize. Self-curing temporary acrylic resin (Imident, Imicryl, Konya, Türkiye) was prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions and 30 samples were prepared by transferring them to moulds of the same size. Half of the samples in each material were polished for 90 seconds with the same dentist using polishing paste (Universal Polishing Paste, Ivoclar Vivadent) (n=15). The surface of each sample was measured three times with a 120˚ angle difference using a profilometer (SJ-201, Mitutoyo, Kanagawa, Japan) and the average was taken. Levene test, t test, two-way ANOVA and Tukey test were used for statistical analysis. A p-value less than 0.05 was accepted for statistical significance.\\nResults: Roughness values 1.9173±0.25078 Ra in the Unpolished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.2807±0.13317 Ra in the Polished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.7760±0.17175 Ra in the Unpolished Standard 3B Resin group, 0 in the Polished Standard 3D Resin group It was found to be 0.1887±0.08340 Ra, 2.4827±0.79651 Ra in the Unpolished Cold Acryl group, and 0.6307±0.22118 Ra in the Polished Cold Acryl group.\\nConclusion: The roughness of 3D printed materials is lower than that of conventional temporary acrylic resin and polishing significantly reduced roughness in all groups.\\n \\nHow to cite this article: \\nServi T, Kölüş T. Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents. Int Dent Res 2022;12(Suppl.1):120-3 https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474\\n \\nLinguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474","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
摘要
目的:本研究的目的是比较聚合临时丙烯酸树脂,标准3D树脂,临时3D树脂材料在抛光和未抛光条件下的表面粗糙度水平。方法:用3D打印机(Photon Mono X, Anycubic)制作30个直径1 cm,高度5 mm的临时3D树脂(别名C & B Temp, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, t rkiye)和标准3D树脂(别名Sharp & Rigid, Dokuz Kimya, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, t rkiye)圆柱体样品。在Wash & Cure Plus (Anycubic)装置中使用异丙醇清洗残余树脂,并在同一装置中在紫外线下保持10分钟以充分聚合。根据制造商的说明制备自固化临时丙烯酸树脂(Imident, Imicryl, Konya, t rkiye),并通过将其转移到相同尺寸的模具中制备30个样品。每种材料中一半的样品由同一位牙医使用抛光膏(Universal polishing paste, Ivoclar Vivadent)抛光90秒(n=15)。每个样品的表面用轮廓仪(SJ-201, Mitutoyo, Kanagawa, Japan)以120˚角差测量三次,取平均值。采用Levene检验、t检验、双因素方差分析和Tukey检验进行统计分析。p值小于0.05为有统计学意义。结果:未抛光临时3D树脂组的粗糙度值为1.9173±0.25078 Ra,抛光临时3D树脂组的粗糙度值为0.2807±0.13317 Ra,未抛光标准3B树脂组的粗糙度值为0.7760±0.17175 Ra,抛光标准3D树脂组的粗糙度值为0。未抛光冷丙烯酸酯组的粗糙度值为0.1887±0.08340 Ra,未抛光冷丙烯酸酯组的粗糙度值为2.4827±0.79651 Ra,抛光冷丙烯酸酯组的粗糙度值为0.6307±0.22118 Ra。结论:3D打印材料的粗糙度低于常规的临时丙烯酸树脂,抛光明显降低了各组材料的粗糙度。本文引用方式:Servi T, Kölüş T.不同含量树脂材料表面粗糙度的评价。Int Dent Res 2022;12(增刊1):120-3 https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474语言修订:本手稿中的英语已由至少两名专业编辑检查,他们都是英语母语者。
Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents
Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the roughness level of the surfaces of polymerized temporary acrylic resin, standard 3D resin, temporary 3D resin materials with polished and unpolished conditions.
Methodology: Thirty samples of 1 cm diameter and 5 mm height cylinders of temporary 3D resin (Alias C & B Temp, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) and standard 3D resin (Alias Sharp & Rigid, Dokuz Kimya, Dokuz Kimya, İstanbul, Türkiye) were produced with 3D printer (Photon Mono X, Anycubic). Residual resins were cleaned in Wash & Cure Plus (Anycubic) device using isopropyl alcohol and kept under UV light for 10 minutes in the same device to fully polymerize. Self-curing temporary acrylic resin (Imident, Imicryl, Konya, Türkiye) was prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions and 30 samples were prepared by transferring them to moulds of the same size. Half of the samples in each material were polished for 90 seconds with the same dentist using polishing paste (Universal Polishing Paste, Ivoclar Vivadent) (n=15). The surface of each sample was measured three times with a 120˚ angle difference using a profilometer (SJ-201, Mitutoyo, Kanagawa, Japan) and the average was taken. Levene test, t test, two-way ANOVA and Tukey test were used for statistical analysis. A p-value less than 0.05 was accepted for statistical significance.
Results: Roughness values 1.9173±0.25078 Ra in the Unpolished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.2807±0.13317 Ra in the Polished Temporary 3D Resin group, 0.7760±0.17175 Ra in the Unpolished Standard 3B Resin group, 0 in the Polished Standard 3D Resin group It was found to be 0.1887±0.08340 Ra, 2.4827±0.79651 Ra in the Unpolished Cold Acryl group, and 0.6307±0.22118 Ra in the Polished Cold Acryl group.
Conclusion: The roughness of 3D printed materials is lower than that of conventional temporary acrylic resin and polishing significantly reduced roughness in all groups.
How to cite this article:
Servi T, Kölüş T. Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents. Int Dent Res 2022;12(Suppl.1):120-3 https://doi.org/10.5577/intdentres.474
Linguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.