| Literature DB >> 29736401 |
Renata A Esteves1, Letícia C C Boaro2, Flávia Gonçalves3, Luiza M P Campos4, Cecy M Silva1, Leonardo Eloy Rodrigues-Filho5.
Abstract
This study evaluated the influence of formulation and thermal treatment on the degree of conversion, fracture toughness, flexural strength, and elastic modulus of experimental composites. Six composites were analyzed at BisGMA : TEGDMA molar ratios of 1 : 1 and 7 : 3 with filler at 30, 50, and 70 wt%. The degree of conversion was analyzed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, fracture toughness was measured using the single-edge notched beam, and flexural strength and elastic modulus were measured with the 3-point bend test. For all tests, one-half of the specimens received thermal treatment at 170°C for 10 min. Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis or ANOVA/Tukey's test (α = 5%). The 1 : 1 BisGMA : TEGDMA ratio showed higher properties than the 7 : 3 ratio. Although the material with 70% filler had a conversion lower than the one with 50%, it showed higher mechanical properties. The thermal treatment improved all properties in all materials. Therefore, the use of an equimolar ratio of BisGMA : TEGDMA can be paired with 70 wt% filler to design dental composites that possess increased advantageous physical and chemical properties. Furthermore, the simple and low-cost method of thermal treatment proposed for use in clinical dentistry has been shown to effectively improve the properties of all evaluated materials.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29736401 PMCID: PMC5875025 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9845427
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Composition of experimental composites.
| BisGMA | TEGDMA | Camphorquinone | Amine | Filler |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | 50 | 2 | 2 | 30 |
| 50 | 50 | 2 | 2 | 50 |
| 50 | 50 | 2 | 2 | 70 |
| 70 | 30 | 2 | 2 | 30 |
| 70 | 30 | 2 | 2 | 50 |
| 70 | 30 | 2 | 2 | 70 |
Means ± standard deviations for degree of conversion (DC), fracture toughness (KIC), flexural strength (FS), and elastic modulus (EM) for BisGMA : TEGDMA molar ratio and thermal treatment factors. For each property, the same letter indicates that there is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05).
| Molar ratio of BisGMA : TEGDMA | Thermal treatment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 : 1 | 7 : 3 | No | Yes | |
| DC (%) | 85 ± 5.2a | 80 ± 7.1b | 77 ± 2.0b | 89 ± 2.0a |
|
| 1.46 ± 0.17a | 1.20 ± 0.17b | 1.26 ± 0.21b | 1.40 ± 0.20a |
| FS (MPa) | 152 ± 15a | 140 ± 15b | 138 ± 15b | 155 ± 14a |
| EM (GPa) | 6.1 ± 2.0a | 5.4 ± 1.8b | 5.3 ± 1.8b | 6.1 ± 1.9a |
Means ± standard deviations for degree of conversion (DC), fracture toughness (KIC), flexural strength (FS), and elastic modulus (EM) for filler concentration factor. For each property, the same letter indicates that there is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05).
| Filler content | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 30% | 50% | 70% | |
| DC (%) | 83 ± 7.0a | 83 ± 7.0a | 82 ± 7.0b |
|
| 1.20 ± 0.20c | 1.34 ± 0.19b | 1.44 ± 0.20a |
| FS (MPa) | 134 ± 16c | 147 ± 13b | 157 ± 11a |
| EM (GPa) | 4.0 ± 0.3c | 5.1 ± 0.9b | 8.1 ± 0.8a |