Journal of investigative and clinical dentistry · 2016
Effect of preheating and shade on surface microhardness of silorane-based composites.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Theodoridis Marios, Dionysopoulos Dimitrios, Koliniotou-Koumpia Eugenia, Dionysopoulos Pavlos, Gerasimou Paris
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of preheating and shade on the surface microhardness of silorane-based composites.
METHODS: Three shades of two different types of composites were evaluated: a silorane-based composite and a methacrylate-based composite. The composites were tested at 23°C, and after preheating at 55°C. Five specimens were prepared for each experimental group. The top surface of the specimens was irradiated for 20 s using an LED unit. Vickers microhardness test was used to evaluate both top and bottom surfaces of the specimens, followed by 24-h storage in the dark. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way anova and Tukey's post-hoc test at a level of significance of α = 0.05.
RESULTS: There was a significant rise in microhardness as the temperature increased from 23 to 55°C for both the top and bottom surfaces of the tested composites (P < 0.05). The C2 shade of both composites exhibited the lowest microhardness (P < 0.05), while the A2 and A3 shades did not show significant differences compared to each other (P > 0.05) Filtek Silorane presented significantly lower microhardness than Filtek Z250 (P < 0.05), regardless of the temperature, shade, or depth of measurement.
CONCLUSIONS: Preheating, shade, and composition of the tested composite resins affected their surface microhardness.
METHODS: Three shades of two different types of composites were evaluated: a silorane-based composite and a methacrylate-based composite. The composites were tested at 23°C, and after preheating at 55°C. Five specimens were prepared for each experimental group. The top surface of the specimens was irradiated for 20 s using an LED unit. Vickers microhardness test was used to evaluate both top and bottom surfaces of the specimens, followed by 24-h storage in the dark. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way anova and Tukey's post-hoc test at a level of significance of α = 0.05.
RESULTS: There was a significant rise in microhardness as the temperature increased from 23 to 55°C for both the top and bottom surfaces of the tested composites (P < 0.05). The C2 shade of both composites exhibited the lowest microhardness (P < 0.05), while the A2 and A3 shades did not show significant differences compared to each other (P > 0.05) Filtek Silorane presented significantly lower microhardness than Filtek Z250 (P < 0.05), regardless of the temperature, shade, or depth of measurement.
CONCLUSIONS: Preheating, shade, and composition of the tested composite resins affected their surface microhardness.