Wen Lien1, Kraig S Vandewalle. 1. Advanced Education in General Dentistry Residency, Wilford Hall Medical Center, Lackland AFB, TX 78236, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To distinguish the physical properties of a new silorane-based restorative material in comparison to five methacrylate-based restorative materials--a compomer, giomer, nanocomposite, hybrid and micro-hybrid. METHODS: The following properties were examined per restorative material: compressive strength, diametral tensile strength, flexural strength/modulus, fracture toughness, microhardness, and polymerization shrinkage. The mean and standard deviation were determined per group. A one-way ANOVA/Tukey was performed per property (alpha=0.05). RESULTS: Significant differences were found between groups per property (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the methacrylate-based restorative materials, the new silorane-based material had the lowest polymerization shrinkage, but an overall mixed mechanical performance. The silorane-based material had relatively higher flexural strength/modulus, fracture toughness, but relatively lower compressive strength and microhardness than the methacrylate-based restorative materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
OBJECTIVES: To distinguish the physical properties of a new silorane-based restorative material in comparison to five methacrylate-based restorative materials--a compomer, giomer, nanocomposite, hybrid and micro-hybrid. METHODS: The following properties were examined per restorative material: compressive strength, diametral tensile strength, flexural strength/modulus, fracture toughness, microhardness, and polymerization shrinkage. The mean and standard deviation were determined per group. A one-way ANOVA/Tukey was performed per property (alpha=0.05). RESULTS: Significant differences were found between groups per property (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the methacrylate-based restorative materials, the new silorane-based material had the lowest polymerization shrinkage, but an overall mixed mechanical performance. The silorane-based material had relatively higher flexural strength/modulus, fracture toughness, but relatively lower compressive strength and microhardness than the methacrylate-based restorative materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Authors: N K Kuper; F H van de Sande; N J M Opdam; E M Bronkhorst; J J de Soet; M S Cenci; M C D J N M Huysmans Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 6.116
Authors: Mariana A Arocha; Juan R Mayoral; Dorien Lefever; Montserrat Mercade; Juan Basilio; Miguel Roig Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2012-09-20 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Françoise H van de Sande; Niek J M Opdam; Gert Jan Truin; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Johannes J de Soet; Maximiliano S Cenci; Marie-Charlotte Huysmans Journal: J Dent Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 4.379