The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the elastic moduli of an unfilled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond) and a filled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond 2) used with and without a low-viscosity resin (LVR) (Filtek™ Flow) as an elastic cavity wall in class V composite restorations,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pong Pongprueksa, Watcharaporn Kuphasuk, Pisol Senawongse
Other Authors: Mahidol University
Format: Article
Published: 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/19159
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Mahidol University
id th-mahidol.19159
record_format dspace
spelling th-mahidol.191592018-07-12T09:33:09Z The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces Pong Pongprueksa Watcharaporn Kuphasuk Pisol Senawongse Mahidol University Dentistry Engineering Materials Science Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the elastic moduli of an unfilled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond) and a filled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond 2) used with and without a low-viscosity resin (LVR) (Filtek™ Flow) as an elastic cavity wall in class V composite restorations, restored with a hybrid resin composite (Z250). Methods: Buccal class V cavities were prepared on extracted premolars and lined with (1) the unfilled adhesive resin, (2) the filled adhesive resin, (3) the unfilled adhesive resin and the flowable composite, and (4) the filled adhesive resin and the flowable composite. All cavities were restored with the hybrid resin composite. The specimens were cut bucco-lingually, embedded in epoxy resin and polished. The polished specimens were evaluated for the elastic modulus with nano-indentation test at the layer of dentin, hybrid layer, adhesive resin, low-viscosity resin and resin composite. Results: The elastic moduli were 25,111 MPa for dentin, 12,243 MPa for hybrid layer of Adper™ Single Bond, 11,765 MPa for hybrid layer of Adper™ Single Bond 2, 7595 MPa for Adper™ Single Bond, 8430 MPa for Adper™ Single Bond 2, 13,543 MPa for Filtek™ Flow and 24,494 MPa for Filtek™ Z250 resin composite. The statistical analysis demonstrated that the elastic moduli were significantly different among layers (p < 0.05) except between hybrid layers of unfilled and filled adhesives (p = 1.0). Conclusion: The application of filled adhesive did not increase the elastic modulus of hybrid layer when compared with the unfilled adhesive resin. The modulus of filled adhesive resin was significantly higher than that of unfilled adhesive resin. © 2008 Academy of Dental Materials. 2018-07-12T02:25:16Z 2018-07-12T02:25:16Z 2008-08-01 Article Dental Materials. Vol.24, No.8 (2008), 1102-1106 10.1016/j.dental.2007.12.008 01095641 2-s2.0-45249084993 https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/19159 Mahidol University SCOPUS https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=45249084993&origin=inward
institution Mahidol University
building Mahidol University Library
continent Asia
country Thailand
Thailand
content_provider Mahidol University Library
collection Mahidol University Institutional Repository
topic Dentistry
Engineering
Materials Science
spellingShingle Dentistry
Engineering
Materials Science
Pong Pongprueksa
Watcharaporn Kuphasuk
Pisol Senawongse
The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
description Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the elastic moduli of an unfilled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond) and a filled adhesive resin (Adper™ Single Bond 2) used with and without a low-viscosity resin (LVR) (Filtek™ Flow) as an elastic cavity wall in class V composite restorations, restored with a hybrid resin composite (Z250). Methods: Buccal class V cavities were prepared on extracted premolars and lined with (1) the unfilled adhesive resin, (2) the filled adhesive resin, (3) the unfilled adhesive resin and the flowable composite, and (4) the filled adhesive resin and the flowable composite. All cavities were restored with the hybrid resin composite. The specimens were cut bucco-lingually, embedded in epoxy resin and polished. The polished specimens were evaluated for the elastic modulus with nano-indentation test at the layer of dentin, hybrid layer, adhesive resin, low-viscosity resin and resin composite. Results: The elastic moduli were 25,111 MPa for dentin, 12,243 MPa for hybrid layer of Adper™ Single Bond, 11,765 MPa for hybrid layer of Adper™ Single Bond 2, 7595 MPa for Adper™ Single Bond, 8430 MPa for Adper™ Single Bond 2, 13,543 MPa for Filtek™ Flow and 24,494 MPa for Filtek™ Z250 resin composite. The statistical analysis demonstrated that the elastic moduli were significantly different among layers (p < 0.05) except between hybrid layers of unfilled and filled adhesives (p = 1.0). Conclusion: The application of filled adhesive did not increase the elastic modulus of hybrid layer when compared with the unfilled adhesive resin. The modulus of filled adhesive resin was significantly higher than that of unfilled adhesive resin. © 2008 Academy of Dental Materials.
author2 Mahidol University
author_facet Mahidol University
Pong Pongprueksa
Watcharaporn Kuphasuk
Pisol Senawongse
format Article
author Pong Pongprueksa
Watcharaporn Kuphasuk
Pisol Senawongse
author_sort Pong Pongprueksa
title The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
title_short The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
title_full The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
title_fullStr The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
title_full_unstemmed The elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
title_sort elastic moduli across various types of resin/dentin interfaces
publishDate 2018
url https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/19159
_version_ 1763490540931776512