Examinando por Materia "Compressive strength"

Mostrando 1 - 7 de 7

Acceso abierto
Comparative in vitro analysis of the compressive resistance of a modified resin with pre-reacted glass ionomer and other hybrid resins, Lima 2019
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2019-11-13) Barrera Luna, Rosa Victoria; Rufasto Goche, Katherine Susan
The objective of this study was to evaluate the in vitro compressive strength of a resin modified with surface pre-reacted glass ionomer and other hybrid resins. Methodology: An experimental, cross-sectional, and prospective study was conducted. The study population consisted of 90 specimens, with a significant sample of 30 specimens: 10 specimens of Beautifil II Shofu®, 10 specimens of Filtek P60 3M®, and 10 specimens of Tetric N Ceram®. Compressive strength was evaluated, and statistical analysis was performed using the ANOVA test. Results: The mean compressive strength for Beautifil II Shofu was 293.94 ± 32.49 MPa; for Tetric N Ceram hybrid resin, it was 251.96 ± 50.25 MPa; and for Filtek P60 3M hybrid resin, it was 374.06 ± 36.28 MPa. Comparisons showed the following ranking in compressive strength: Filtek P60 3M > Beautifil II Shofu (p<0.05) and Filtek P60 3M > Tetric N Ceram (p<0.05). Conclusions: Among the evaluated modified resins, Filtek P60 demonstrated the highest compressive strength, followed by Beautifil II and Tetric N Ceram.
Acceso abierto
Compressive strength of three bioceramic cements: mta, biodentine and mta repair hp, - in vitro. lima 2020
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2021-11-23) Luis Fernández, Alessandra Junet; Gil Cueva, Silvia Liliana
Objective: To determine the compressive strength of three bioceramic cements: Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), MTA Repair HP, and Biodentine in vitro. Methodology: The total sample consisted of 60 blocks, divided into 20 for each bioceramic cement group. The study was experimental, longitudinal, and comparative, where the compressive strength of three bioceramic cements—Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), MTA Repair HP, and Biodentine—was measured in vitro at 24 and 48 hours after preparation. Statistical analysis was performed using the ANOVA and Shapiro statistical tests. Results: For all three cements, the compressive strength was higher at 48 hours than at 24 hours: MTA 3.69 MPa/2.51 MPa; MTA Repair HP 2.96 MPa/1.47 MPa; and Biodentine 69.97 MPa/51.28 MPa, with a significant difference (p<0.001). A time-dependent difference was observed between MTA and MTA Repair HP (p<0.001). Conclusion: Biodentine demonstrated higher compressive strength compared to MTA and MTA Repair HP, making it a better alternative among calcium silicate-based bioceramic materials.
Acceso abierto
Evaluation of the compressive strength of a composite resin inserted directly incrementally versus block insertion and with pre-photopolymerized resin: in vitro study, 2021
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2024-06-06) Sobrevilla Alarcón, Anai Yesenia; Arauzo Sinchez, Carlos Javier
One of the major disadvantages of composite resins is their post-photopolymerization shrinkage effect when incremented by more than 2mm in thickness. Due to this, alternative options such as Bulk Fill resins, which allow for an increase of up to 5mm in thickness, and the use of previously photopolymerized resins, are available in the market. Objective: To determine which composite resin insertion technique in proximal cavities has greater compressive strength. Methodology: 45 resin samples were made using acrylic tooth cavities measuring 4x10mm, which were replicated through condensation silicone impressions. The resin samples were from the 3M ESPE brand and divided into three groups: G1: n=15 (Filtek Z350 XT Resin); G2: n=15 (Filtek Bulk Fill Resin); G3: n=15 (Filtek Z350 Resin with Z350 XT Flowable Resin). The resin insertion techniques for G1 used an incremental technique of 2mm thickness; G2 used a block technique with a single 5mm increment; and G3 used a mixed technique with flowable resin and pre-photopolymerized resins. The samples were calibrated and measured using a caliper and periodontal probe. Once the samples were obtained, they were subjected to a compressive strength test using a mechanical testing machine and a Digital Vernier (LG-CMT-5L Mitutoyo-200mm). Results: The compressive strength was 994.88 Newtons using the block technique, 1458.19 Newtons with the incremental technique, and 1241.30 Newtons with the pre-photopolymerized resin technique. There was a significant difference showing higher resistance using the incremental technique compared to the block technique (p<0.05). Conclusion: The incremental resin insertion technique has greater resistance to fracture compared to the block and pre-photopolymerized resin techniques.
Acceso abierto
Experimental compressive strength of Portland cement associated with zirconium microparticles compared to the mineral Trioxide added-in vitro. Lima-2020
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2021-05-11) Cherres Sevilla, Reina Ysabel; Garavito Chang, Enna Lucila
Calcium silicate cements are commonly used in the field of endodontics. For this reason, Portland cement, due to its very similar composition, is being used for various endodontic therapies. This thesis aims to determine the experimental compressive strength of Portland cement associated with zirconia microparticles compared to MTA in Lima, 2020. The study is in vitro experimental. Portland cement, MTA Angelus cement, and Portland cement associated with zirconia microparticles were used in a sample consisting of 10 test bodies per group, totaling (n=30). The experimental compressive strength of the cements was evaluated using the Universal Instron® testing machine with compressive load in kN at a speed of 1mm/min, expressed in MPa. The results showed that Portland cement (CP) had the highest strength, followed by MTA-Angelus, and the Portland cement + zirconium microparticles (CP + OZi) group showed the lowest strength after 48 hours. Conclusion: Zirconia microparticles associated with Portland cement did not improve the mechanical properties after 48 hours, but Portland cement could potentially be used as an alternative to MTA-based materials.
Acceso abierto
In vitro evaluation of the mechanical resistance to compression of endodontic bioceramic cements: MTA, MTA Repair HP and Neomta2
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2020-08-31) Rivera Leon, Elvis Manuel; Meza de Pastor, Verónica Llerena
Objective: To determine the mechanical resistance (R) to compressive force of endodontic bioceramic materials MTA, MTA Repair HP, and NeoMTA2. Methodology: The sample consisted of 60 specimens divided into three groups of 20 samples each, representing the bioceramic materials. Observations were made by longitudinally comparing sections to measure the compressive strength of the endodontic bioceramic materials MTA, MTA Repair HP, and NeoMTA2 in vitro at 7 and 28 days post-fabrication. Statistical distinction was conducted using ANOVA and Shapiro tests. Results: The sample analysis revealed that compressive strength (R) was higher at 28 days compared to 7 days, with the following results: MTA 18.7810 MPa / 13.8810 MPa, MTA Repair HP 39.2890 MPa / 21.8990 MPa, and NeoMTA2 23.0190 MPa / 34.1920 MPa. Significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed between MTA and MTA Repair HP, and discrepancies were noted over time (p < 0.001). Conclusion: NeoMTA2 demonstrated higher compressive strength compared to MTA and MTA Repair HP, making it a viable option as a bioceramic material.
Acceso abierto
Resistance to compression of composite resins at different densities. in vitro study. lima – peru. 2021
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2021-11-17) Tantaleán Mendoza, Licet Amparo; Girano Castaños, Jorge Alberto
Objective: To determine the compressive strength of composite resins with different densities. Methodology: Two high-density resins (Filtek Z350XT – 3M Espe and Tetric N Ceram – Ivoclar Vivadent) and two low-density resins (Filtek Flow – 3M Espe and Tetric Flow – Ivoclar Vivadent) were used. These resins were molded into resin cylinders with 10 mm in height and 4 mm in diameter using a plastic mold, where increments of 2 mm were added until the required dimensions were reached. Once the resin cylinders were formed, they were taken to the mechanical testing laboratory for the compression test, where the universal testing machine applied a downward force of 1 mm/min on each resin cylinder until fracture. Data were recorded electronically by the testing equipment. Results: The results showed that the compressive strength of the high-density resins was 218.86 ± 31.18 MPa for Filtek Z350XT and 218.86 ± 31.18 MPa for Tetric N Ceram. The compressive strength of the low-density resins was 225.96 ± 23.32 MPa for Filtek Flow and 186.30 ± 17.3 MPa for Tetric Flow. Conclusion: The low-density resin Filtek Flow exhibited the highest compressive strength, followed by the high-density resins Filtek Z350XT and Tetric N Ceram, and lastly, the low-density resin Tetric Flow.
Acceso abierto
Resistance to compression of the Nanohybrid resin in comparison with the Bulk Fill type resin using the incremental and Monoincremental technique. in vitro study
(Universidad Privada Norbert Wiener, 2021-01-12) Gámez Céspedes, Elmer Iván; Llerena Meza De Pastor, Verónica
Objective: To compare the compressive strength of nanohybrid resin and bulk-fill resin using the incremental and monoincremental techniques. Methodology: Two types of resins were used: a nanohybrid resin and a bulk-fill resin. Both were molded into cylindrical shapes with dimensions of 8 mm in length and 4 mm in diameter. Cylinders formed using the incremental technique were created in 2 mm increments, while those formed using the monoincremental technique were created in 4 mm increments. These cylinders were subjected to compression testing using a universal testing machine, applying compressive force until fracture. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 23 with the Student's t-test for independent samples. Results: The compressive strength of nanohybrid resin using the monoincremental technique was 254.90 ± 38.97 MPa, while for the incremental technique, it was 199.65 ± 44.29 MPa. On the other hand, the compressive strength of bulk-fill resin using the monoincremental technique was 226.36 ± 28.17 MPa, and for the incremental technique, it was 211.16 ± 19.97 MPa. Conclusion: The compressive strength of bulk-fill resin using the monoincremental technique was greater than that of nanohybrid resin using the incremental technique.