Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate and to compare the surface hardness of three types of resin-based materials used for direct restoration after heating at different temperatures. A giomer (Beautifil II, Shofu Dental), a compomer (Dyract eXtra, Dentsply Sirona) and a hybrid composite resin (Gaenial Posterior, GC Corporation) were selected for this study. Twenty disk-shaped specimens of each material were heated at room temperature (21�C), at 37�C, at 50�C and at 60�C. Vickers microhardness test was performed on top and bottom surfaces using digital microhardness tester (Micro-Vickers Hardness System CV- 400DMTM, CV Instruments Namicon). The top and bottom surfaces VHN was calculated as a mean value of five determinations. Also, the microhardness ratio was calculated by dividing the top mean VHN value by bottom mean VHN value. Increased mean hardness values were recorded after heating, irrespective of resin-based tested materials. The highest hardness values were recorded after heating all three materials at 60�C, followed by the hardness recorded at 50�C, 37�C and 21�C. For top surfaces, the lowest hardness value was recorded in Dyract eXtra group when samples were warmed at room temperature and the highest hardness value was obtained in Beautifil II group when samples where heated at 60�C. For the bottom surfaces, Dyract eXtra specimens heated at 21�C presented the lowest hardness values and Beautifil II samples heated at 60�C presented the highest hardness values. On top and on bottom surfaces Dyract eXtra showed the lowest hardness values, followed by G-aenial Posterior and Beautifil II, irrespective the heating temperature.
Highlights
Composite resins have gain popularity during the time and are the most used materials for direct restoration
The mean Vickers microhardness values (VHN) on the top and on the bottom surfaces of three commercial resinbased materials pre-heated at different temperatures are presented in table 2
The lowest hardness value was recorded in Dyract eXtra group when samples were warmed at room temperature and the highest hardness value was obtained in Beautifil II group when samples where heated at 60°C
Summary
Composite resins have gain popularity during the time and are the most used materials for direct restoration. Polyacid modified composites or compomers have dimethacrylate monomer having two carboxylic groups present in their structure and fillers that are similar to the ion-leachable glass present in glassionomer cements They have some advantages like dentin and enamel adhesion, stable matrix structure, fluoride releasing and reduced microleakage [1417]. The aim of this study was to evaluate and to compare the surface hardness of three types of resin-based materials used for direct restoration after heating at different temperatures. Three resin-based materials: a giomer (Beautifil II, Shofu Dental) (group 1), a compomer (Dyract eXtra, Dentsply Sirona) (group 2) and a hybrid composite resin (Gaenial Posterior, GC Corporation) (group 3) were selected for this study.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
