Literature DB >> 16040441

Evaluation of some properties of two fiber-reinforced composite materials.

Lippo V J Lassila1, Arzu Tezvergil, Milla Lahdenperä, Pasi Alander, Akiyoshi Shinya, Akikazu Shinya, Pekka K Vallittu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Water sorption, flexural properties, bonding properties, and elemental composition of photopolymerizable resin-impregnated fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) materials (everStick C&amp;B and BR-100) (FPD) were evaluated in this study. <br> MATERIAL AND METHODS: Bar-shaped specimens (2 x 2 x 25 mm) were prepared for water sorption and flexural strength testing. The specimens (n = 6) were polymerized either with a hand light-curing unit for 40 s or, additionally, in a light-curing oven for 20 min and stored in water for 30 days. Water sorption was measured during this time, followed by measurements of flexural strength and modulus. A shear bond strength test was performed to determine the bonding characteristics of polymerized FRC to composite resin luting cement (Panavia-F), (n = 15). The cement was bonded to the FRC substrate and the specimens were thermocycled 5000 times (5-55 degrees C) in water. SEM/EDS were analyzed to evaluate the elemental composition of the glass fibers and the fiber distribution in cross section. <br> RESULTS: ANOVA showed significant differences in water sorption according to brand (p < 0.05). Water sorption of everStick C&amp;B was 1.86 wt% (hand-unit polymerized) and 1.94 wt% (oven polymerized), whereas BR-100 was 1.07 wt% and 1.17 wt%, respectively. The flexural strength of everStick C&amp;B after 30 days' water storage was 559 MPa (hand-unit polymerized) and 796 MPa (oven-polymerized); for BR-100, the values were 547 MPa and 689 MPa, respectively. Mean shear bond strength of composite resin cement to the FRC varied between 20.1 and 23.7 MPa, showing no statistical difference between the materials. SEM/EDS analysis revealed that fibers of both FRC materials consist of the same oxides (SiO2, CaO, and Al2O3) in ratios. The distribution of fibers in the cross section of specimens was more evenly distributed in everStick C&amp;B than in BR-100. <br> CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that there are some differences in the tested properties of the FRC materials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16040441     DOI: 10.1080/00016350510019946

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Odontol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6357            Impact factor:   2.331


  5 in total

1.  BisGMA/TEGDMA dental composite containing high aspect-ratio hydroxyapatite nanofibers.

Authors:  Liang Chen; Qingsong Yu; Yong Wang; Hao Li
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Comprehensive properties of a novel fiber reinforced composite with a UEDMA-based resin matrix.

Authors:  Meng Zhang; Jukka Pekka Matinlinna; Michael George Botelho; Eija Sinikka Säilynoja
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 2.634

3.  Adherence of Streptococcus mutans to Fiber-Reinforced Filling Composite and Conventional Restorative Materials.

Authors:  Lippo V J Lassila; Sufyan Garoushi; Johanna Tanner; Pekka K Vallittu; Eva Söderling
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2009-12-04

4.  Bond strength of a new Kevlar fiber-reinforced composite post with semi-interpenetrating polymer network (IPN) matrix.

Authors:  Ahmed G Almaroof; Samer A Thyab; Ahmed H Ali
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2019-08-01

5.  Continuous and short fiber reinforced composite in root post-core system of severely damaged incisors.

Authors:  Sufyan Garoushi; Pekka K Vallittu; Lippo V J Lassila
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2009-03-18
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.