This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Ye, Q. Articles by Spencer, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ye, Q. Articles by Spencer, P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

In vitro Performance of Nano-heterogeneous Dentin Adhesive

¹ Bioengineering Research Center, University of Kansas, 1530 W. 15th Street, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA;
² Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS;
³ University of Missouri-Kansas City, School of Dentistry, Kansas City, MO;
⁴ Department of Civil Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS; and
⁵ Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Effect of hydrophilic component in photoinitiators on degree of conversion (left) and mechanical properties (right) of model resin cured in the presence/absence of water. Traces represent a single determination for each type of sample; average values of final degree of conversion and mechanical properties (n = 4 or 8 ± SD) are reported in the Table.

View larger version (85K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. TMAFM images of model adhesive cured in the absence of water (a) and model nanophase-separated specimens cured in the presence of water and with different photoinitiators: (b) CQ/EDMAB/ DPIHP and (c) QTX&CQ/DMAEMA/DPIHP. Topographic images (left) are shown with corresponding phase images (right). Section analysis of phase contrast for (b) and (c) is shown on the far right, and the average values of phase contrast (n = 4) are reported in the Table. The adhesive (a) was cured in the presence of hydrophobic photoinitiators. Images for adhesives cured in the presence of hydrophilic photoinitiators were similar (not shown here). The magnification of these images is indicated by the scan dimension, which is 1 µm. The Z range of topographic images and phase images is 10 nm and 10°, respectively.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Effect of 3 months’ aqueous storage on the (a) modulus of elasticity and (b) toughness of model adhesives made with hydrophobic or hydrophilic photoinitiators and cured in the absence or presence of water; n = 8 ± SD at each timepoint. *Significantly different from the mechanical property of neat resin at the same timepoint, = 0.05. #Significantly different from the mechanical property of the same resin at t = 1d, = 0.05.

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 87, No. 9, 829-833 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/154405910808700911


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?