English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 17918/22935 (78%)
Visitors : 7181699      Online Users : 281
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.csmu.edu.tw:8080/ir/handle/310902500/21579


    Title: Compressive strength of lithium disilicate inlay cementation on three different composite resins
    Authors: Weng, Jui-Hung
    Chen, Hui-Ling
    Chen, Gin
    Cheng, Chung-Hsiao
    Liu, Jeng-Fen
    Contributors: 中山醫;牙醫系
    Keywords: Bulkfill composite resin;Ceramic inlay;Immediate dentin;sealing;Lithium disilicate
    Date: 2021-07-01
    Issue Date: 2021-08-11T03:20:48Z (UTC)
    Publisher: Elsevier Inc.
    ISSN: 1991-7902
    Abstract: Background/purpose
    Ceramic restorations have been increasingly applied over recent years. But the performance of cement is still unknown after cementation. This study was aimed to compare the compressive strength and the performances of three different types of composite resin after lithium disilicate inlay cementation.

    Materials and methods
    Twenty-four human maxillary premolars were embedded in resin blocks, finished a MOD inlay preparation and scanned with an extraoral scanner. Lithium disilicate ceramic inlays (IPS e.max, Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein) were fabricated according to the scanner's model. All the specimens were then etched, bonded, and cemented with three different composite resins. Right after 5000 thermal cyclings, the specimens were accepted compressive tests to evaluate the compressive strength and failure types. Moreover, the fracture fragments of the specimens were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to verify the fracture type.

    Results
    Dual-cured resin cement (Rely X Ultimate) showed the highest compressive strength (1002 ± 508 N), followed by the light-cured flowable resin (Z350 XT) (971 ± 209 N) and light-cured bulkfill (Filtek Bulkfill) resin (581 ± 191 N). Type IV (root fracture) failures in the dual-cured resin cement group was 25%, and light-cured flowable resin was 37.5%. But none of type IV fracture was found in the light-cured bulkfill flowable group.

    Conclusion
    Dual-cured resin cement demonstrates the highest compressive strength after ceramic inlay cementation. Light-cured bulkfill resin shows the lowest compressive strength, but catastrophic failure is absent in this group.
    URI: https://ir.csmu.edu.tw:8080/handle/310902500/21579
    Relation: Journal of Dental Sciences, 2021-07-01, 卷 16, 期 3, 頁面 994-1000,
    Appears in Collections:[口腔醫學研究所] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML240View/Open


    SFX Query

    All items in CSMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback