Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites

Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fateme Azizi (Author), Fariba Ezoji (Author), Soraya Khafri (Author), Behnaz Esmaeili (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Tehran University of Medical Sciences, 2023-05-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_3f518f19e1a044089523c4c7b31f8d4d
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Fateme Azizi  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Fariba Ezoji  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Soraya Khafri  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Behnaz Esmaeili  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites 
260 |b Tehran University of Medical Sciences,   |c 2023-05-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 10.18502/fid.v20i10.12609 
500 |a 2676-296X 
520 |a Objectives: The durability of composite restorations is directly affected by the mechanical properties of the composite. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hardness and wear resistance of self-adhesive flowable composite (SAF) in comparison with conventional flowable composites. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 50 composite specimens were prepared in brass molds with 10mm ×10mm ×2mm and divided into five groups (n=10). Specimens included three conventional flowable composites (Grandio flow, Filtek flow and Admira fusion flow), one self-adhering flowable composite (SAF, Vertise flow) and a microhybrid composite (filtek z250). After polishing, the micro-hardness of the specimens was measured in a Vickers hardness device, and the specimens were then subjected to 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000, 80000 and 120000 wear cycles in a wear tester. One-way ANOVA/Games-Howell, Kruskal Wallis, and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at P<0.05. Results: The surface micro-hardness of the SAF was significantly lower than that of the microhybrid composite (P=0.01). There was no significant difference between the surface hardness of the different tested flowable composites (P>0.05). Also, the wear resistance of the studied composites was not significantly different in various cycles (P>0.05). Conclusion: Based on our results, SAF would not be an ideal substitute for conventional flowable composites in high-stress areas. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Dental Restoration Wear 
690 |a Hardness; Composite Resins 
690 |a Flowable Hybrid Composite 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Frontiers in Dentistry, Vol 20 (2023) 
787 0 |n https://fid.tums.ac.ir/index.php/fid/article/view/4166 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2676-296X 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/3f518f19e1a044089523c4c7b31f8d4d  |z Connect to this object online.