MICROHARDNESS AND FLEXURAL STRENGHT OF RESINS FOR THE POSTERIOR SECTOR: IN VITRO STUDY

Descripción del Articulo

Introduction. Contemporary resin composites have improved mechanical properties, such as microhardness and flexural strength, to better withstand masticatory loads. Nevertheless, fracture and wear remain common causes of failure in posterior restorations. Objective. To compare the surface microhardn...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Becerra-Gutiérrez, Jerica Alejandra, López-Flores, Ana Isabel
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2025
Institución:Universidad Científica del Sur
Repositorio:Revistas - Universidad Científica del Sur
Lenguaje:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:revistas.cientifica.edu.pe:article/3237
Enlace del recurso:https://revistas.cientifica.edu.pe/index.php/odontologica/article/view/3237
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:flexural strength
mechanical properties
surface microhardness
posterior resin composites
resistencia a la flexión
propiedades mecánicas
microdureza superficial
resinas sector posterior
Descripción
Sumario:Introduction. Contemporary resin composites have improved mechanical properties, such as microhardness and flexural strength, to better withstand masticatory loads. Nevertheless, fracture and wear remain common causes of failure in posterior restorations. Objective. To compare the surface microhardness and flexural strength of Filtek™ Z350 XT (3M ESPE), Estelite Posterior (Tokuyama), Beautifil II (Shofu), and Opallis (FGM). Materials and Methods. In vitro study with four resin composites (n = 10 per group). Disc-shaped specimens (5 mm × 2 mm) were used to evaluate Vickers microhardness (VHN), and bar-shaped specimens (25 mm × 2 mm × 2 mm) to perform a three-point bending test using a universal testing machine. Results. For flexural strength, Estelite Posterior showed the highest mean (136.59 ± 9.13 MPa). For surface microhardness, Filtek Z350 XT yielded the highest value (67.99 ± 2.60 VHN). Significant differences were found among groups (p < 0.001), except between Z350 XT and Estelite Posterior for microhardness (p = 0.101) and flexural strength (p = 0.252). Conclusion. Filtek Z350 XT and Estelite Posterior exhibited higher surface microhardness and flexural strength compared with Beautifil II and Opallis. Clinical Relevance. These results support more informed selection of posterior restorative materials, considering performance and longevity in the oral environment prior to clinical use.
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).