RESUMO
Abstract This study evaluates the effect of curing modes and times on the mechanical properties of nanocomposites. Two nanocomposite resins were investigated: suprananohybrid (Estelite Posterior Quick; EP) and nanohybrid (Solare X; SX). They were polymerized with a light-emitting diode light-curing units (LED LCU, Valo) as follows: standard mode for 20s (ST20), high power mode for 12s (HP12), high power mode for 20s (HP20), extra power mode for 6s (XP6), and extra power mode for 20s (XP20). For Vickers microhardness (HV), disc-shaped specimens were fabricated (n=10). For the three-point bending test, bar-shaped specimens were fabricated (n=10). Flexural strength and resilience modulus were calculated. The fractured surfaces and specimen surfaces of composites were observed using scanning electron microscopy. The data were analyzed with repeated measures ANOVA, two-way variance, and Bonferroni tests (p<0.05). On the top and bottom surfaces of the EP nanocomposite resin, ST20 and HP12 revealed statistically higher HV than with XP6. Moreover, HP20 and XP20 had statistically higher HV than HP12 and XP6. For the SX nanocomposite resin, HP20 had statistically higher HV than HP12. For EP and SX, there were no significant differences in flexural strength and resilience modulus regarding the curing modes and times. Furthermore, SX demonstrated lower mechanical properties than EP. Scanning electron microscopy indicated that both nanocomposites had similar surface appearances. However, with all curing modes and times, SX exhibited layered fractures and more crack formations than EP. Different curing modes and times could influence the microhardness of nanocomposites.
Resumen Este estudio evalúa el efecto del modo y tiempo de fotocurado sobre las propiedades mecánicas de los nanocompuestos. Se investigaron dos resinas nanocompuestas: supra-nanohíbrida (Estelite Posterior Quick; EP) y nanohíbrida (Solare X; SX). Se polimerizaron con unidades de fotopolimerización de diodos emisores de luz (LED LCU, Valo) de la siguiente manera: modo estándar durante 20s (ST20), modo de alta potencia durante 12s (HP12), modo de alta potencia durante 20s (HP20) , modo extra power durante 6s (XP6) y modo extra power durante 20s (XP20). Para la microdureza Vickers (HV), se fabricaron especímenes en forma de disco (n=10). Para el ensayo de flexión de tres puntos, se fabricaron probetas en forma de barra (n=10). Se calcularon la resistencia a la flexión y el módulo de resistencia. Las superficies fracturadas se observaron mediante microscopía electrónica de barrido. Los datos se analizaron con ANOVA varianza de dos vías y pruebas de Bonferroni (p<0,05). En las superficies superior e inferior de la resina nanocompuesta EP, ST20 y HP12 revelaron un HV estadísticamente mayor que con XP6. Además, HP20 y XP20 tenían un HV estadísticamente más alto que HP12 y XP6. Para la resina nanocompuesta SX, HP20 tenía un HV estadísticamente más alto que HP12. Para EP y SX, no hubo diferencias significativas en la resistencia a la flexión y el módulo de resistencia con respecto al modo y tiempo de fotocurado. Además, SX demostró propiedades mecánicas inferiores que EP. La microscopía electrónica de barrido indicó que ambos nanocompuestos son similares en la superficie. Sin embargo, SX exhibió fracturas en capas y más formaciones de grietas que EP. Diferentes modos y tiempos de fotocurado podrían influir en la microdureza de los nanocompuestos.
Assuntos
Nanocompostos , Cura Luminosa de Adesivos Dentários , TurquiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Adhesive systems are continuously being introduced to Dentistry, unfortunately often without sufficient clinical validation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of cervical restorations done with three different adhesive systems. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 158 non-carious cervical lesions of 23 patients were restored with a nanofilled composite resin (Filtek Supreme, 3M/ESPE) combined with Single Bond (3M/ESPE, group SI), Clearfil SE (Kuraray Medical Inc., group CL) and Xeno III (De Trey Dentsply, group XE). In groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B, the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin was removed by roughening with a diamond bur before application of the respective adhesive systems. In groups CL-BP and XE-BP, after removal of the outer surface of the sclerotic dentin with the bur, the remaining dentin was etched with 37% phosphoric acid and the self-etch adhesive systems Clearfil SE and Xeno III were applied, respectively. Lesions were evaluated at baseline, and restorations after 3 months, 1 year and 2 years using modified USPHS criteria. RESULTS: After 2 years, no significant difference was found between the retention rates of the groups (p >0.05). Although groups CL and SI showed significantly better marginal adaptation than group XE (p<0.05) at 2 years, no significant difference was found between the marginal adaptation of the groups SI-B, CL-B and XE-B (p>0.05). After 2 years no significant difference was observed among the marginal staining results of all groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Although all adhesive systems showed similar retention rates, Clearfil SE and Single Bond showed better marginal adaptation than Xeno III after 2 years of follow-up.