Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This laboratory study aimed to replace the traditional bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate ( bis GMA) resin system with a urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA)-based resin system to enhance the physicomechanical properties of dental restorative composite (DRC). We evaluated surface roughness, porosity %, nanohardness, elastic modulus, and compressive strength (CS) in the control group (the bis GMA-resin system) and two experimental groups (UDMA-based resin systems with 20 wt.% SiO 2 or Al 2 O 3 , each 30 μ m in size spherical fillers). Cylindrically shaped samples 4 mm in diameter and 6 mm in height were fabricated using light curing (n = 10). One-way analysis of variance method was used to statistically analyze the results (p ≤ 0.05). The data suggest that both UDMA-based resin systems showed increased surface roughness (R a ) and porosity % in the sample fabrication compared with the control. However, the nanohardness in both SiO 2 -based UDMA composite (0.20 ± 0.09 GPa) and Al 2 O 3 -based UDMA composite (0.22 ± 0.07 GPa) was not significantly higher compared with the control (0.19 ± 0.05 GPa). Likewise, while improved CS values were observed in both SiO 2 -based UDMA composite (15.5 ± 1.9 MPa) and Al 2 O 3 -based UDMA composite (16.2 ± 0.7 MPa) compared to the control (14.5 ± 4.5 MPa), this increase was not statistically significant. The newly developed UDMA-based resin formulation with Al 2 O 3 micro-filler showed promising physicomechanical properties and may be appropriate for use as DRC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khan et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: