离子释放修复材料的机械特性

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE American journal of dentistry Pub Date : 2024-02-01
Marija Lalovic, Veljko Kolak, Irena Melih, Ana Nikitovic, Isaak Trajkovic, Milos Milosevic, Djordje Pejanovic, Dragana Pesic
{"title":"离子释放修复材料的机械特性","authors":"Marija Lalovic, Veljko Kolak, Irena Melih, Ana Nikitovic, Isaak Trajkovic, Milos Milosevic, Djordje Pejanovic, Dragana Pesic","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate and compare the laboratory compressive strength (CS), flexural strength (FS), and diametral tensile strength (DTS) of Cention Forte and three bulk fill restorative materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 168 specimens were prepared following the manufacturers' instructions and standards for testing CS, FS, and DTS. Mechanical properties of Cention Forte (LC-Cent) were compared to three commercial bulk-fill materials for posterior restorations: Fuji IX Extra (Fuji), Tetric PowerFill (TPF), and Equia Forte HT (Equia). The tests were performed 24 hours after storage in distilled water on a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/minute. Strength values (MPa) were calculated and statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (P< 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis showed significant differences between tested materials for CS, FS, and DTS (P= 0.0001). LC-Cent showed the highest mean value for FS (112.8 MPa) with a significant difference compared to Fuji and Equia. DTS (49.2 MPa) of LC-Cent was significantly higher than all tested materials. TPF showed the highest mean value (180 MPa) for CS but without significant difference compared to LC-Cent.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Ion-releasing material Cention Forte, according to obtained results, may serve as a viable alternative for posterior restorations compared to conventional bulk-fill restorative materials.</p>","PeriodicalId":7538,"journal":{"name":"American journal of dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanical properties of ion-releasing restorative materials.\",\"authors\":\"Marija Lalovic, Veljko Kolak, Irena Melih, Ana Nikitovic, Isaak Trajkovic, Milos Milosevic, Djordje Pejanovic, Dragana Pesic\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate and compare the laboratory compressive strength (CS), flexural strength (FS), and diametral tensile strength (DTS) of Cention Forte and three bulk fill restorative materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 168 specimens were prepared following the manufacturers' instructions and standards for testing CS, FS, and DTS. Mechanical properties of Cention Forte (LC-Cent) were compared to three commercial bulk-fill materials for posterior restorations: Fuji IX Extra (Fuji), Tetric PowerFill (TPF), and Equia Forte HT (Equia). The tests were performed 24 hours after storage in distilled water on a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/minute. Strength values (MPa) were calculated and statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (P< 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis showed significant differences between tested materials for CS, FS, and DTS (P= 0.0001). LC-Cent showed the highest mean value for FS (112.8 MPa) with a significant difference compared to Fuji and Equia. DTS (49.2 MPa) of LC-Cent was significantly higher than all tested materials. TPF showed the highest mean value (180 MPa) for CS but without significant difference compared to LC-Cent.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Ion-releasing material Cention Forte, according to obtained results, may serve as a viable alternative for posterior restorations compared to conventional bulk-fill restorative materials.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7538,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估和比较 Cention Forte 和三种散装填充修复材料的实验室抗压强度 (CS)、抗弯强度 (FS) 和直径拉伸强度 (DTS):方法:按照制造商的说明和标准制备了 168 个试样,用于测试 CS、FS 和 DTS。将 Cention Forte(LC-Cent)的机械性能与三种用于后牙修复的商业散装填充材料进行比较:Fuji IX Extra (Fuji)、Tetric PowerFill (TPF) 和 Equia Forte HT (Equia)。测试是在蒸馏水中存放 24 小时后,在万能试验机上以 0.75 毫米/分钟的十字头速度进行的。计算强度值(兆帕),并通过单因素方差分析和 Tukey 后检验进行统计分析(P< 0.05):分析表明,CS、FS 和 DTS 的测试材料之间存在明显差异(P= 0.0001)。LC-Cent 的 FS 平均值最高(112.8 兆帕),与 Fuji 和 Equia 相比差异显著。LC-Cent 的 DTS(49.2 兆帕)明显高于所有测试材料。TPF 显示 CS 的平均值最高(180 兆帕),但与 LC-Cent 相比差异不大:临床意义:根据所得结果,离子释放材料 Cention Forte 与传统的大量填充修复材料相比,可作为后牙修复的可行替代材料。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mechanical properties of ion-releasing restorative materials.

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the laboratory compressive strength (CS), flexural strength (FS), and diametral tensile strength (DTS) of Cention Forte and three bulk fill restorative materials.

Methods: A total of 168 specimens were prepared following the manufacturers' instructions and standards for testing CS, FS, and DTS. Mechanical properties of Cention Forte (LC-Cent) were compared to three commercial bulk-fill materials for posterior restorations: Fuji IX Extra (Fuji), Tetric PowerFill (TPF), and Equia Forte HT (Equia). The tests were performed 24 hours after storage in distilled water on a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/minute. Strength values (MPa) were calculated and statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (P< 0.05).

Results: Analysis showed significant differences between tested materials for CS, FS, and DTS (P= 0.0001). LC-Cent showed the highest mean value for FS (112.8 MPa) with a significant difference compared to Fuji and Equia. DTS (49.2 MPa) of LC-Cent was significantly higher than all tested materials. TPF showed the highest mean value (180 MPa) for CS but without significant difference compared to LC-Cent.

Clinical significance: Ion-releasing material Cention Forte, according to obtained results, may serve as a viable alternative for posterior restorations compared to conventional bulk-fill restorative materials.

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
American journal of dentistry
American journal of dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
57
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Dentistry, published by Mosher & Linder, Inc., provides peer-reviewed scientific articles with clinical significance for the general dental practitioner.
期刊最新文献
A comparison of polishing systems and thermal cycling on the surface roughness and color stability of a single-shade resin composite. Charcoal dentifrices: A laboratory study of their safety and efficacy. Current landscape of research on whitening toothpastes and their effects on dental hard tissue. Effects of salivary contamination on the shear bond strengths of universal adhesives to dentin. Framework's marginal adaptation evaluation of fixed partial denture using conventional and digital impression techniques.
×
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