The effect of the simulated aging by thermocycling on the elastic modulus of ethylene-vinyl acetate brands and stress/strain development during an impact: An in vitro and 3D-FEA analysis.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Mouthguards are used to prevent dental trauma and orofacial injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) aging by thermocycling on elastic modulus, stress, strain and shock absorption ability of different ethylene-vinyl acetate brands used for mouthguards. METHODS: Thirty EVA samples with a dimension of 70 × 10 × 3 mm were obtained from four commercial brands (Bioart®, Erkodent®, Polyshok® and Proform®). Fifteen samples were submitted to 10,000 cycles (5°C-55°C) in a thermocycling machine with an immersion time of 30 s and a transfer time of 5 s. The samples were submitted to a uniaxial tensile test in a universal testing machine to calculate the elastic modulus. Data were statistically evaluated by two-way ANOVA and Holm-Sidak test. A three-dimensional model of the anterior maxilla was created using Rhinoceros 5.0. A 3 mm custom-fitted mouthguard was simulated. The three-dimensional volumetric mesh was generated using the Patran software (MSC Software) with isoparametrics, 4-noded tetrahedral elements and exported to Marc/Mentat (MSC Software) as element number 134. A non-linear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object struck the central incisor at a speed of 5 m/s. The stresses were evaluated by the modified von Mises criteria and the strains were also recorded. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed for elastic modulus values (p < .001). Mean and standard deviation values (MPa) without thermocycling were: Bioart (34.5 ± 0.9), Erkodent (15.0 ± 0.4), Polyshok (17.3 ± 0.4), Proform: (20.6 ± 0.8); and with thermocycling: Bioart (25.4 ± 0.8), Erkodent (10.7 ± 0.5), Polyshok (13.3 ± 0.6), Proform (13.1 ± 0.6). The thermocycling process reduced stress and strain levels regardless of the mouthguard materials. Shock absorption ability calculated based on the strain values was increased with thermocycling process. CONCLUSION: The thermocycling process, regardless of the commercial brand, reduced the stress/strain and increased the shock absorption ability of mouthguards.

The effect of pulp volume and impact direction on the stress and strain distribution during an impact.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Dentoalveolar trauma has a high incidence in different age groups, including the extremes, children, and older people. Mouth aging leads to some changes, one of them being the pulp volume reduction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different pulp cavity volumes and the impact direction on the stress and strain distribution of a maxillary central incisor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty cone beam computed tomography sets of images were selected and the pulp cavity volume was measured by ITK-SNAP software. The mean pulp cavity volume for age group of 10- to 12-year-olds was calculated to obtain the largest one. Subsequent reductions (25%, 50%, 75% and 100%) in the pulp volume values were made to simulate the aging process. The maxilla anterior segment was modeled in the Rhinoceros 5.0 software. The three-dimensional volumetric mesh was generated using the Patran software (MSC. Software), with isoparametrics, 4-noded tetrahedral elements, and exported to Marc/Mentat (MSC. Software) as element number 134. A non-linear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a steel ball reached the central incisor at a speed of 5 m/s in the horizontal or vertical direction. The stresses were evaluated by modified von Mises stresses. The strains and the total displacement were also recorded. RESULTS: The pulp volume mean value for the age group of 10- to 12-year-olds was 65.05 mm3 . Stress concentrations were slightly different for the different pulp volumes. Impact directions resulted in different stress distribution. Higher stress values were present with the horizontal impact (range between 25.18 MPa and 24.08 MPa for enamel and 38.89 MPa and 37.03 for dentin) when compared to vertical impact (range between 15.30 MPa and 14.58 for enamel and 24.77 to 22.03 MPa for dentin). Total displacement was different for the two impact directions and higher for the horizontal impact. CONCLUSION: Pulp volume did not significantly affect the stress, strain, and total displacement during the impact but the impact direction did affect the evaluated parameters during impact.

Influence of different ethylene-vinyl acetate brands used for custom-fitted mouthguard fabrication on the stress and strain during an impact.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The use of custom-fitted mouthguards can effectively prevent dentoalveolar trauma during sports practice. The aims of this study were to (1) Evaluate the elastic modulus of different EVA commercial brands used for custom-fitted mouthguards, and (2) Evaluate whether the different EVA brands can influence the stress and strain generated during an impact simulated by three-dimensional finite element analysis. METHODS: The elastic modulus of five EVA commercial brands (Essence® , Bio-Art® , Proform® , PolyShok® , and Erkodent® ) were calculated through uniaxial tensile tests. The obtained values were evaluated statistically by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's test. A three-dimensional model of the anterior maxilla was created using the Rhinoceros 5.0. A 3 mm custom-fitted mouthguard was simulated. The three-dimensional volumetric mesh was generated using the Patran software (MSC.Software) with isoparametrics, 4-noded tetrahedral elements, and exported to Marc/Mentat (MSC.Software) as element number 134. A non-linear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object struck the central incisor at a speed of 5 m/s. The stresses were evaluated by the modified von Mises criteria, and the strains were also recorded. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed for elastic modulus values (p < .001). Median values and the results of the Dunn's test were Essence® (38.1 A), Bio-Art® (34.9 AB), Proform® (20.8 BC), PolyShok® (17.4 CD), and Erkodent® (15.0 D) (different capital letters mean statistical differences among the groups). Stresses and strains generated in the model with mouthguards were significantly lower than the model without a mouthguard regardless of the commercial brand. There was no significant difference in the stress and strain on the enamel and dentin with the different EVA brands. The shock absorption ability was high for all the brands (more than 80%). CONCLUSION: The custom-fitted mouthguards, independently of the commercial brand, reduced stresses and strains during the impact.

Using a professional DSLR camera to measure total shrinkage of resin composites.

This study evaluated the optical method for measuring free total shrinkage using a Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) camera. Eight composites were evaluated, conventional, bulk fill and low-shrinkage: Z100 (3M Oral Care), Gradia Direct Anterior (GC corporation), Spectra Smart (Dentsply), Filtek Z350 XT (3M Oral Care), Aura Bulk Fill (SDI), Vittra APS (FGM), Opus Bulk Fill APS (FGM), and Beautifil II LS (Shofu Inc.). The samples (6 mm diameter and 1.5 mm thick, n = 10) were placed on a polyvinylsiloxane impression material. An image of the uncured sample was captured using a DSLR camera with 105 mm macro lens and a ring flash. Samples were light cured with a 700 mW/cm2 LED light-cure unit for 40s. Post-polymerization images were captured at 2, 10 and 60 min. Projected circumferential areas of the specimens were drawn using the ImageJ software. Volumetric total shrinkage was calculated from the ratio of the areas obtained from pre- and post-curing. Results were analyzed using One-way ANOVA (α = 0.05) and Tukey test. Volumetric total shrinkage values were significantly different among the composite materials (p < .001). The volumetric shrinkage (%) mean and results of Tukey test at 60 min were: Z100: 3.45±0.30 (A); Gradia Direct Anterior: 3.00 ± 0.23 (B); Spectra Smart 2.89 ± 0.35 (B); Filtek Z350 XT: 2.65 ± 0.37 (BC); Aura Bulk Fill: 2.42 ± 0.25 (CD); Vittra APS: 2.14 ± 0.35 (DE); Opus Bulk Fill APS: 1.91 ± 0.24 (E); Beautifil II LS: 1.18 ± 0.16 (F). The optical method using a DSLR camera, was suitable for total shrinkage evaluation and will allow assessment of total shrinkage without the need for specialized equipment.

Using a professional DSLR camera to measure total shrinkage of resin composites

Abstract This study evaluated the optical method for measuring free total shrinkage using a Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) camera. Eight composites were evaluated, conventional, bulk fill and low-shrinkage: Z100 (3M Oral Care), Gradia Direct Anterior (GC corporation), Spectra Smart (Dentsply), Filtek Z350 XT (3M Oral Care), Aura Bulk Fill (SDI), Vittra APS (FGM), Opus Bulk Fill APS (FGM), and Beautifil II LS (Shofu Inc.). The samples (6 mm diameter and 1.5 mm thick, n = 10) were placed on a polyvinylsiloxane impression material. An image of the uncured sample was captured using a DSLR camera with 105 mm macro lens and a ring flash. Samples were light cured with a 700 mW/cm2 LED light-cure unit for 40s. Post-polymerization images were captured at 2, 10 and 60 min. Projected circumferential areas of the specimens were drawn using the ImageJ software. Volumetric total shrinkage was calculated from the ratio of the areas obtained from pre- and post-curing. Results were analyzed using One-way ANOVA (α = 0.05) and Tukey test. Volumetric total shrinkage values were significantly different among the composite materials (p < .001). The volumetric shrinkage (%) mean and results of Tukey test at 60 min were: Z100: 3.45±0.30 (A); Gradia Direct Anterior: 3.00 ± 0.23 (B); Spectra Smart 2.89 ± 0.35 (B); Filtek Z350 XT: 2.65 ± 0.37 (BC); Aura Bulk Fill: 2.42 ± 0.25 (CD); Vittra APS: 2.14 ± 0.35 (DE); Opus Bulk Fill APS: 1.91 ± 0.24 (E); Beautifil II LS: 1.18 ± 0.16 (F). The optical method using a DSLR camera, was suitable for total shrinkage evaluation and will allow assessment of total shrinkage without the need for specialized equipment.