[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
8.0
4.7
Journals
Polymers
Special Issues
Functional Polymeric Materials for Dental and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery...
share announcement

Functional Polymeric Materials for Dental and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Applications

A special issue of Polymers (ISSN 2073-4360). This special issue belongs to the section "Polymer Applications".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 March 2025 | Viewed by 1745

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Dr. Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry of Pernambuco, University of Pernambuco, Recife 50100-130, PE, Brazil
Interests: resin composites; adhesive dentistry; biocompatibility; dental substrates; polymerization shrinkage

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The application of polymeric materials in dentistry, in its most diverse specialties, has been an undeniable trend, ranging from the development of new restorative resin composites with controlled polymerization contraction and ultra-fast polymerization, adhesive systems, elastomeric materials for precision impressions, polymeric materials used in orthodontics, oral rehabilitation and oral and maxillofacial prostheses to the use of polymeric materials for internal prosthesis in the reconstruction of facial sequelae. The development and use of polymers in dentistry is an area of great promise.

By launching this Special Issue, we aim to bring together a collection of articles that present new techniques and evaluations of relevant properties of polymers used in the most diverse dental specialties. All original research papers and review articles related to this topic from leading groups around the world are welcome.

Prof. Dr. Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Polymers is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • polymers in dentistry
  • resin composites
  • dental adhesives
  • polymeric impression materials
  • biocompatibility
  • acrylic resins

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

18 pages, 2227 KiB  
Article
Comparative Assessment of the Influence of Various Time Intervals upon the Linear Accuracy of Regular, Scannable, and Transparent Vinyl Polysiloxane-Based Bite Registration Materials for Indirect Dental Restoration Fabrication
by Firas K. Alqarawi, Bandar M. A. AL-Makramani, Praveen Gangadharappa, Khurshid Mattoo, Maryam Hadi, Mohammad Alamri, Ebrahim Fihaid Alsubaiy, Saeed M. Alqahtani and Mohammed E. Sayed
Polymers 2025, 17(1), 52; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym17010052 - 28 Dec 2024
Viewed by 410
Abstract
Interocclusal records (IORs) created with bite registration materials (BRMs) accurately reflect the opposing teeth’s physiological and anatomical associations in digital and traditional dentistry. This study assessed the linear dimensional accuracy of vinyl polysiloxane-based scannable and transparent BRMs over obligatory clinical time intervals (1, [...] Read more.
Interocclusal records (IORs) created with bite registration materials (BRMs) accurately reflect the opposing teeth’s physiological and anatomical associations in digital and traditional dentistry. This study assessed the linear dimensional accuracy of vinyl polysiloxane-based scannable and transparent BRMs over obligatory clinical time intervals (1, 24, 72, and 168 h/s). A total of 3 scannable [Flexitime Bite, Occlufast CAD, Virtual CADBite] and 3 transparent [Maxill Bite, Charmflex Bite, Defend ClearBite] VPS-based BRMs were divided into 28 subgroups by time interval: 1, 24, 72, and 168 h/s. Stereomicroscope measurements of 420 standardised disk-shaped specimens with three distinct linear distances between crossing vertical and horizontal lines were taken. Comparisons with the conventional BRM determined the scannable and transparent BRMs’ accuracy, while comparisons with die dimensions yielded linear dimensional changes. Statistical analysis used median rank scores, interquartile range, and median. Using a one-way ANOVA rank and Dunn test, differences were assessed between and within groups at a probability ‘p’ value of 0.05 (p ≤ 0.05). Mean linear dimensions for CAD and transparent IOR materials were [−0.06 (−0.24%) to −0.15 (−0.6%)] and [−0.06 (0.24%) to −0.10 (0.40%)] millimetres, respectively. Virtual CADBite and Maxill Bite had the lowest linear disagreement after 1 h, but both showed significant variations at 7 days. Other commercial brands maintained their clinically acceptable linear accuracy (0.11). Flexitime Bite (CAD) was the sole material with a linear accuracy above the clinical threshold. IOR shrinkage reduced the linear dimensions in all materials. Until 7 days, all IOR materials except Flexitime bite (CAD) were clinically correct. Virtual CADBite and Maxill bite changed significantly during 1 h and 7 days. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Functional Polymeric Materials for Dental and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Applications)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Components and dimensions of a three-unit standard stainless-steel die and the coordinates used for measuring linear accuracy.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Study flow chart showing materials, variables, groups, and subgroups.</p> Full article ">
14 pages, 1446 KiB  
Article
Assessment of Surface Roughness, Color, and Bonding Efficacy: Self-Adhesive vs. Conventional Flowable Resin
by Caroline de Farias Charamba Leal, Beatriz Barros Viana, Samille Biasi Miranda, Renally Bezerra Wanderley e Lima, Cleyton Cézar Souto Silva, Rodrigo Barros Esteves Lins, André Ulisses Dantas Batista, Ana Karina Maciel de Andrade and Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes
Polymers 2024, 16(18), 2556; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16182556 - 10 Sep 2024
Viewed by 934
Abstract
This in vitro study aimed to analyze the surface roughness (Ra) and color stability (ΔEab, ΔE00) following simulated mechanical brushing and to evaluate the microtensile (μTBS) of self-adhering resin flowable (SARF) to dentin. The selected materials were Constic, Yflow AS, and Tetric N [...] Read more.
This in vitro study aimed to analyze the surface roughness (Ra) and color stability (ΔEab, ΔE00) following simulated mechanical brushing and to evaluate the microtensile (μTBS) of self-adhering resin flowable (SARF) to dentin. The selected materials were Constic, Yflow AS, and Tetric N flow (TNF/control). Thirty composite resin cylinders were fabricated for surface property evaluation. Ra and color were assessed both before and after simulated brushing. The thresholds of 50:50% perceptibility and acceptability of color differences in the evaluated resins were assessed. For μTBS analysis, fifteen molars were selected, sectioned to expose flat dentin surfaces, and restored according to the manufacturers’ instructions for microtensile testing. There were statistically significant differences in Ra among the groups, with Constic exhibiting the highest Ra value (0.702 µm; p < 0.05), whereas Yflow AS presented the lowest Ra value (0.184 µm). No statistically significant difference in color was observed among the groups (p > 0.05). The 50:50% perceptibility and acceptability thresholds were set at 1.2 and 2.7 for ΔEab and 0.8 and 1.8 for ΔE 00. All the results fell within the acceptable limits. The mean μTBS values of Constic, Yflow AS, and TNF were 10.649 MPa, 8.170 MPa, and 33.669 MPa, respectively. This study revealed increased Ra and comparable color stability among all the tested composite resins after abrasion. However, the SARF exhibited lower μTBS compared to conventional using an adhesive system. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Functional Polymeric Materials for Dental and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Applications)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Bar chart showing the mean values with standard deviations for different groups (TNF, Constic, and Yflow SA) analyzed for color stability using the CIELAB system (ΔEab). The red dashed line represents the perceptibility threshold (ΔEab = 1.2), and the purple dashed line represents the acceptability threshold (ΔEab = 2.7). The black lines indicate the standard deviation, showing the variation around the mean for each group.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Bar chart showing the mean values with standard deviations for different groups (TNF, Constic, and Yflow SA) analyzed for color stability using the CIEDE 2000 system (ΔE00). The red dashed line represents the perceptibility threshold (ΔEab = 0.8), and the purple dashed line represents the acceptability threshold (ΔEab = 1.8). The black lines indicate the standard deviation, showing the variation around the mean for each group.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Bar chart showing the mean μTBS values (MPa) and standard deviations of the groups (TNF, Constic, and Yflow SA).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Bar chart showing the distribution of fracture patterns of the groups (TNF, Yflow SA, and Constic) after the dentin bond strength test. Legend: A: Adhesive failure, which is a fracture within the adhesive layer. C: Cohesive failure, either within the resin composite or dentin. M: Mixed failure, where the fracture involves more than one material. P: Pretest failure, indicating that the fracture occurred before testing the sample. G: Failure outside the testing area, where the sample was attached to the device.</p> Full article ">
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop