Cargando…

Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites

Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Azizi, Fateme, Ezoji, Fariba, Khafri, Soraya, Esmaeili, Behnaz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10258403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37312832
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609
_version_ 1785057459329564672
author Azizi, Fateme
Ezoji, Fariba
Khafri, Soraya
Esmaeili, Behnaz
author_facet Azizi, Fateme
Ezoji, Fariba
Khafri, Soraya
Esmaeili, Behnaz
author_sort Azizi, Fateme
collection PubMed
description Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 50 composite specimens were prepared in brass molds with 10mm ×10mm ×2mm and divided into five groups (n=10). Specimens included three conventional flowable composites (Grandio flow, Filtek flow and Admira fusion flow), one self-adhering flowable composite (SAF, Vertise flow) and a microhybrid composite (filtek z250). After polishing, the micro-hardness of the specimens was measured in a Vickers hardness device, and the specimens were then subjected to 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000, 80000 and 120000 wear cycles in a wear tester. One-way ANOVA/Games-Howell, Kruskal Wallis, and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at P<0.05. Results: The surface micro-hardness of the SAF was significantly lower than that of the microhybrid composite (P=0.01). There was no significant difference between the surface hardness of the different tested flowable composites (P>0.05). Also, the wear resistance of the studied composites was not significantly different in various cycles (P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on our results, SAF would not be an ideal substitute for conventional flowable composites in high-stress areas.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10258403
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102584032023-06-13 Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites Azizi, Fateme Ezoji, Fariba Khafri, Soraya Esmaeili, Behnaz Front Dent Original Article Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 50 composite specimens were prepared in brass molds with 10mm ×10mm ×2mm and divided into five groups (n=10). Specimens included three conventional flowable composites (Grandio flow, Filtek flow and Admira fusion flow), one self-adhering flowable composite (SAF, Vertise flow) and a microhybrid composite (filtek z250). After polishing, the micro-hardness of the specimens was measured in a Vickers hardness device, and the specimens were then subjected to 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000, 80000 and 120000 wear cycles in a wear tester. One-way ANOVA/Games-Howell, Kruskal Wallis, and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at P<0.05. Results: The surface micro-hardness of the SAF was significantly lower than that of the microhybrid composite (P=0.01). There was no significant difference between the surface hardness of the different tested flowable composites (P>0.05). Also, the wear resistance of the studied composites was not significantly different in various cycles (P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on our results, SAF would not be an ideal substitute for conventional flowable composites in high-stress areas. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2023-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10258403/ /pubmed/37312832 http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Tehran University of Medical Sciences. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Azizi, Fateme
Ezoji, Fariba
Khafri, Soraya
Esmaeili, Behnaz
Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title_full Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title_fullStr Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title_full_unstemmed Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title_short Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites
title_sort surface micro-hardness and wear resistance of a self-adhesive flowable composite in comparison to conventional flowable composites
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10258403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37312832
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609
work_keys_str_mv AT azizifateme surfacemicrohardnessandwearresistanceofaselfadhesiveflowablecompositeincomparisontoconventionalflowablecomposites
AT ezojifariba surfacemicrohardnessandwearresistanceofaselfadhesiveflowablecompositeincomparisontoconventionalflowablecomposites
AT khafrisoraya surfacemicrohardnessandwearresistanceofaselfadhesiveflowablecompositeincomparisontoconventionalflowablecomposites
AT esmaeilibehnaz surfacemicrohardnessandwearresistanceofaselfadhesiveflowablecompositeincomparisontoconventionalflowablecomposites