In vitro wear resistance of three types of composite resin denture teeth

Zeng, Jianyu; Sato, Yoshiaki; Ohkubo, Chikahiro; Hosoi, Toshio

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.08.010

Cited by 84 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In several studies, the filler content was found to affect the physical properties of dental restorative materials, such as microhardness and polymerization shrinkage [11][12][13][14] . In the present study, there was a negligible correlation (r<-0.01) between the SBS value and the filler content (vol%) for the materials tested.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The low viscosity of flowable resins is achieved by reducing the filler loading. However, this may eventually weaken the physical properties of the flowable resins, such as microhardness and wear resistance, which are influenced by filler loading within the resin matrix [11][12][13][14] . In addition, cases of increased polymerization shrinkage -which was greater than other resin-based restorative materials -due to the increased resin matrix in conjunction with the reduced filler loading have been reported [14][15][16][17] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of flowable resins on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

Park

Son

Ko³

et al. 2009

Dent. Mater. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study tested the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to teeth using flowable resins. A total of 105 human teeth were divided into seven groups. The brackets in each group were bonded to the tooth substrates using a Transbond XT adhesive and six other different flowable resins, respectively. Each adhesive resin was light-cured using a quartz-tungsten-halogen (QTH) light for 40 seconds. The brackets were debonded in shear mode using a universal testing machine. The brackets bonded using Tetric Flow and Grandio Flow showed slightly greater SBS values (13.0±1.8 and 12.2±1.2 MPa, respectively) than the Transbond XT adhesive (12.1±1.2 MPa). However, the SBS values of Transbond XT, X-flow, Tetric Flow, Grandio Flow, and Filtek Z350 flow were not significantly different. As for Admira Flow and Aelite Flow, they scored significantly lower SBS values (7.0±2.1 and 9.2±1.3 MPa, respectively) than the other groups. On bracket failure mode, statistical analysis revealed a similar failure mode among all the seven test groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of flowable resins on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

Park

Son

Ko³

et al. 2009

Dent. Mater. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wear resistance can be assessed by combining tests such as mechanical toothbrushing, abrasion between teeth and different materials, composition analysis, chewing simulators, and structural microhardness testing 12,[14][15][16][17][18] . Mechanical toothbrushing with toothpaste plays an important role in artificial tooth surface wear, as, in addition to the effects of bristle friction on the material, the abrasive compounds present in the majority of toothpaste formulations may potentiate abrasion wear on the surface [19][20] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial teeth: evaluation of wear resistance, microhardness and composition

Grando

Pacheco

Botega

et al. 2015

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the Knoop hardness, composition, and wear resistance of acrylic-resin artificial teeth exposed to mechanical toothbrushing. Methods Artificial under a 200-g load and at a frequency of 250 cycles per minute, using a soft-bristled toothbrush (IndicatorPlus 30, Oral-B) soaked in a 1:1 toothpaste/water slurry (Oral B Pró Saúde). Microhardness testing was performed using a 25-g load for 15 seconds in an HMV-2 hardness tester (Shimadzu). The composition of teeth from different brands was determined by scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS) (Jeol JSM 5800). Results Wear results after mechanical brushing were compared by means of the paired t-test, whereas those obtained in microhardness testing were compared by ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. There was no statistically significant difference between brands in either trial. ConclusionComposition analysis revealed that all of the artificial teeth analyzed contain carbon and oxygen. Trilux and Soluut PX brand teeth also contain silicon; however, the presence of filler particles did not result in increased resistance.

show abstract

“…The mechanical properties of the artificial tooth and the adhesive agents and the bond strength between the tooth substance and artificial teeth are considered insufficient for long-term use, although the reliability of the properties of each material has been reported. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] However, the DBFPDP technique is based on the concept of minimal intervention since it can conserve the enamel of the abutment teeth. The DBFPDP is a useful prosthetic method when it is reinforced with additional materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%