4종의 간접법용 복합 레진의 기계적 특성 비교 = COMPARISON OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES IN 4 INDIRECT COMPOSITE RESIN

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Statement of problem: The esthetic component of dental care has become increasingly more important, while new tooth-colored materials are continually marketed. Various new indirect composite materials have been developed with required advantages. The most recent development in the indirect composites has been the introduction of the second-generation laboratory composite or poly-glass materials. They are processed by different laboratory techniques based on combinations of heat, pressure, vacuum and light polymerization. Although, second generation products became available in 1995, their characteristics and clinical performance have not been adequately investigated. Purpose: The aim of this study was to measure the mechanical properties of the second generation indirect resin system and compare these with an existing universal direct composite resin. Material and method: In this study four indirect composite material (Adoro LC, BelleGlass HP, Tescera, Synfony) were tested for flexural strength, wear resistance, hardness and their degree of conversion against Z250, a light cure direct composite. Results: Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions were drawn: 1. From the abrasion wear result, Adoro showed the least volume loss while Synfony showed the greatest volume loss. Z250 and BelleGlass HP didn't show significant difference (p>0.05), but they showed significant difference with other groups (p<0.05). From the attrition wear, BelleGlass HP showed the least volume loss and it didn’t show significant difference with Tescera (p>0.05). While Synfony showed the greatest volume loss that it showed significant difference with other groups (p>0.05). 2. Mean values of flexural strength by means of three point bending test was in the order of Z250, Adoro, Belleglass HP, Tescera and Synfony. Mean elastic modulus was in the order of Z250, BelleGlass HP, Tescera, Adoro and Synfony. 3. The result of Vicker‘s microhardness value showed that significantly higher value in Z250 (p<0.05), and is in the order of BelleGlass HP, Tescera, Adoro and Synfony. 4. The degree of conversion measured by FT-IR showed significantly higher value in BelleGlass HP (p<0.05), and is in the order of Adoro, Synfony, Tescera and Z250. Conclusion: Significant differences were found in the flexural strength, wear resistance, hardness and their degree of conversion.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "and hardness of dentalcomposite resins-is there a relationship" 395-398,

2 "Wear of dental restorative and prosthet-ic materials in vitro" 5 : 35-37, 1989

3 "Wear in dentistry-current ter-minology" 20 : 140-144, 1992

4 "Wear and marginal breakdown ofcomposites with various degrees of cure" 76 : 1508-1516, 1997

5 "Two body wear resistance anddegree of conversion of laboratory processedcomposite materials" 12 : 432-438, 1999

6 "The science and art of den-tal ceramics" 16 : 149-30156, 1991

7 "The effect ofresin formulation on the degree of conversionand mechanical properties of dentalrestorative resins" 20 : 121-131, Res1986

8 "The effect of heat used as asecondary cure upon the physical proper-ties of three composite resins II" 351-356, quintessenceint1987

9 "Second generationlaboratory composite resins for indirectrestouations" 9 : 108-118, 1997

10 "Relationship be-tween abrasive wear and microstructure ofcomposite resin" 40 : 220-224, 1988

11 "Post-cure heattreatments for composites:propertiesand fractography" 8 : 290-295, 1992

12 "Microstructure of pos-terior restorations of composite resins af-ter clinical Wear" 5 : 90-4, 1980

13 "Mechanical propertiesof a composite inlay material following post-curing" 171 : 246-248, 1991

14 "Mechanical properties of light-curedcomposites polymerized with several ad-ditional post-curing methods" 30 : 389-394, 2005

15 "Influence of filler parameterson the mechanical coherence of dentalrestorative resin composites" 17 : 735-740, 1996

16 "In vit-ro characterization of two laboratory-processed resin composites" 19 : 393-398, 2003

17 "Hardness and compressive strength ofindirect composite resins: ettects of im-mersion in distilled water" 31 : 1085-1089, 2004

18 "Effects of secondary curing on indirectposterior composite resins" 19 : 217-220, Dent1994

19 "Effect ofresin monomer composition on toothbrushwear resistance" 25 : 264-268, 1998

20 "Effect of polymerization under pressureon indirect tensile mechanical propertiesof light-polymerized composites" 88 : 381-387, 2002

21 "Correlation be-tween degree of conversion filler con-centration and mechanical properties of pos-terior composite resins" 487-494, joralrehab1990

22 "Conversion in dif-ferent depths of ultraviolet and visiblelight activated composite meterials" 40 : 179-192, 1982

23 "Compressive creepof light-cured resin based restorative ma-terials" 40 : 319-324, 1982

24 "Comparative mechanical property char-acterization of three indirect composite resinmaterials compared with two direct com-posites" 14 : 380-386, 2003

25 "Benefits and disadvantagesof tooth coloured alternatives to amal-gam" 25 : 459-473, 1997

26 "A comparison ofthe wear resistance and harkness of indirectcomposite resins" 85 : 386-395, 2001

27 "A classification ofdental composites according to theirmerphological and mechanical character-istics" 8 : 310-319, 1992