Evaluation of surface roughness of resin materials with different contents

IF 0.2 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of International Clinical Dental Research Organization Pub Date : 2022-12-31 DOI:10.5577/intdentres.474
Turan Servi, T. Kölüş
{"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":"33 1","pages":""},"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}
引用次数: 0

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. 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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同含量树脂材料表面粗糙度的评价
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。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the accuracy of intraoral scanners used in single-unit implant prosthesis construction Evaluation of the buccal bone thickness in the anterior maxillary region using cone-beam computed tomography Evaluation of the alveolar bone and lingual concavity in the posterior mandibular region based on cone-beam computed tomography data Evaluation of the effect of class II fixed orthodontic treatment on the periradicular bone structure of endodontically treated mandibular molar teeth using fractal dimension analysis Analyzing biomimetic dentistry YouTube videos' quality and content
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1