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

Wear and roughness analysis of two highly filled flowable composites. | LitMetric

This in vitro study aimed to evaluate surface roughness and wear of highly filled flowables and traditional packable composites. Additionally, the effect of polymerization time on these parameters was evaluated. Two flowable higly filled composites (CMf-Clearfil Majesty ES flow-low viscosity, Kuraray and GUf-Gaenial Universal Injectable, GC) and two packable composites (CM-Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray and GU-Gaenial A'CHORD, GC) were used to create 160 specimens (n = 40;8 × 6 × 4mm). For each tested material, two subgroups were considered according to the polymerization time (n = 20): 10 s or 80 s. After setting, the specimens were subjected to chewing simulations (240.000 cycles, 20N), and wear was measured by the laser integrated in the chewing simulator. The surface roughness was measured using a rugosimeter, before and after chewing cycles. Two representative specimens per group were observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were collected and statistically analyzed (p < 0.05). Wear analysis highlighted statistically significant differences between the groups: CMf10-CMf80 (p = 0.000), CMf10-CM10 (p = 0.019), CMf10-GUf10 (p = 0.002), CM10-CM80 (p = 0.000), CM80-GUf80 (p = 0.02), GUf10-GUf80 (p = 0.000), GUf10-GU10 (p = 0.043) and GU10-GU80 (p = 0.013). Statistically significant differences in surface roughness were highlighted between the groups: CMf10-CMf80 (p = 0.038), CMf80-CM80 (p = 0.019), CMf80-GU80 (p = 0.010), CM80-GUf80 (p = 0.34) and GUf80-GU80 (p = 0.003). Surface roughness and wear of highly filled flowable composites were comparable to that of traditional paste composites. Furthermore, a longer curing time leads to an improvement in the mechanical properties of the composites. Highly filled flowables can be a valid alternative to paste composites in occlusal areas due to its similar surface roughness and wear values, especially when overcured.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10266-024-01013-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

highly filled
8
surface roughness
8
packable composites
8
polymerization time
8
wear roughness
4
roughness analysis
4
analysis highly
4
filled flowable
4
composites
4
flowable composites
4

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!