A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Microhardness assessment of different commercial brands of resin composites with different degrees of translucence. | LitMetric

Owing to improvements in its mechanical properties and to the availability of shade and translucence resources, resin composite has become one of the most widely used restorative materials in present day Dentistry. The aim of this study was to assess the relation between the surface hardness of seven different commercial brands of resin composites (Charisma, Fill Magic, Master Fill, Natural Look, Opallis, Tetric Ceram, and Z250) and the different degrees of translucence (translucid, enamel and dentin). Vickers microhardness testing revealed significant differences among the groups. Z250 was the commercial brand that showed the best performance in the hardness test. When comparing the three groups assessed within the same brand, only Master Fill and Fill Magic presented statistically significant differences among all of the different translucencies. Natural Look was the only one that showed no significant difference among any of the three groups. Charisma, Opallis, Tetric Ceram and Z250 showed significant differences among some of the tested groups. Based on the results found in this study, it was not possible to establish a relation between translucence and the microhardness of the resin composites assessed. Depending on the material assessed, however, translucence variation did affect the microhardness values of the resin composites.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1806-83242008000400013DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

resin composites
16
commercial brands
8
brands resin
8
degrees translucence
8
fill magic
8
master fill
8
opallis tetric
8
tetric ceram
8
ceram z250
8
three groups
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!