Strength and fatigue performance versus filler fraction of different types of direct dental restoratives
Strength and fatigue performance versus filler fraction of different types of direct dental restoratives
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jbm.b.30338
复制
发表时间：
2006-01-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Petschelt, A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lohbauer, U;Frankenberger, R;Petschelt, A
本研究的目的是评估当今树脂复合牙修复体的力学性能，如杨氏模量、断裂强度(FS)和弯曲疲劳极限。所有材料都被细分为可流动的、美观的混杂和纳米填充的混杂复合材料，正如牙科制造商销售的那样，并根据实际的填料配置进行分析。试件试件参照ISO4049标准制作，光固化20天，S 20次，试验前保存在蒸馏水中。用四点弯曲试验法测定存放14天后的弹性模量(EM)、弹性模量(ITS)和弯曲疲劳极限(FFL)。测定104个周期的FFL。疲劳数据采用“阶梯法”分析，统计处理采用ANOVA分析。与填充量较高的材料相比，填料含量较少的可流动材料的杨氏模数最低。弹性模量与填充量呈线性关系(r(2)=0.798)。FS和疲劳数据与不同填料组分之间的相关性无法得到证实。FS为61.3Mpa~124.9 Mpa。在10(4)次疲劳加载后，FS下降了45.2%至61.7%。然而，提供高初始强度的材料并不明显地表现出最好的抗疲劳性能。以市场为基础的直接修复材料分组对机械性能的实验室测试没有意义。(C)2005年威利期刊公司。
The aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical properties, such as Young's moduli, fracture strengths (FS), and flexural fatigue limits of todays resin composite dental restoratives. All materials have been subdivided into flowable, aesthetic hybrid and nano-filled hybrid composites as marketed by dental manufacturers and analyzed in terms of the actual filler configurations. Specimen bars have been manufactured in reference to ISO 4049 standard, light-cured for 20 s, and stored in distilled water before testing. The elastic moduli (EM), ITS, and flexural fatigue limits (FFL) were measured after 14 days storage by using the four-point bending test. The FFL was determined for 104 cycles. The fatigue data were analyzed by using the "staircase" approach and statistically treated by ANOVA analysis. Flowable materials with a reduced filler content exhibited the lowest Young's moduli, compared with those measured for higher filled materials. A linear relationship has been found between elastic moduli and filler loading (r(2) = 0.798). Correlations of FS and fatigue data to different filler fractions could not be proved. FS ranged between 61.3 and 124.9 MPa. After 10(4) cycles of fatigue loading, the FS suffered from a decrease between 45.2 and 61.7%. However, materials providing high initial strengths do not obviously reveal the best fatigue resistance. A marketing-based grouping of direct restorative materials has no meaning toward laboratory testing of mechanical properties. (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.