BACKGROUND The objective of our study was to compare the upper and lower surface microhardness and surface changes of Glass Carbomer Cement (GCP) and EQUIA Forte (EF) in different thickness after thermo-light curing durations and aging. METHODS A total of 504 samples (5 mm-diameter) were prepared by using GCP-252 (GCP Dental, and Vianen, Netherlands) and EF-252 (EQUIA Forte, GC, Tokyo, Japan). Three different thickness samples (2, 4, and 6 mm) were prepared with 84 samples in each subgroup. The samples were prepared by three curing procedures (Non-exposed, 60s, 90s). Their varnishes were applied to the upper surfaces of half of each subgroup (n = 7). The upper microhardness measurements were evaluated before and after aging. To compare the effect of different thicknesses, the bottom surfaces of the samples were evaluated before aging in terms of microhardness measurements. Also, the upper surfaces were analyzed in the SEM before and after aging. RESULTS The upper surface values of all the samples were higher than the bottom values (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the varnished and non-varnished samples in both materials (p > 0.05). Although this increase was not significant in some groups, temperature variations increased the surface microhardness values of both materials except for the non-exposed-varnished EF samples. The highest microhardnesses values were recorded in the non-exposed-varnished EF (125.6 ± 6.79) and unvarnished GCP (88.1 ± 7.59) samples which were thermo-light cured for 90 s before aging. The bottom hardness values were affected by thickness variations in both GCP and EF materials (p < 0.05). The sample deformations and microcracks after aging were greater than before in all the materials. Thermo-light curing in 90 s to the samples reduced the cracks in both the materials before and after aging. CONCLUSIONS Thermal aging adversely affected the microhardness of the materials, which is important for clinical success. The thermo-light curing process improved the microhardness of the GCP group without varnish application. Varnish application increased the microhardness of the EF group without applying thermo-light curing. The microhardness of the bottom surfaces decreased with increasing thickness. The thermo-light curing did not increase the bottom surface microhardness of all the samples.

中文翻译：

---

玻璃卡波姆和高粘度玻璃离子聚合物在热循环老化后的不同厚度和热光固化时间下的显微硬度。

背景技术我们的研究目的是比较玻璃纤维水泥（GCP）和EQUIA Forte（EF）在热光固化时间和老化后在不同厚度下的上下表面显微硬度和表面变化。方法使用GCP-252（GCP Dental和Vianen，荷兰）和EF-252（EQUIA Forte，GC，东京，日本）制备了504个样品（直径5毫米）。制备了三个不同厚度的样品（2、4和6 mm），每个子组中有84个样品。通过三种固化程序（未曝光，60s，90s）制备样品。他们的清漆涂在每个亚组一半的上表面（n = 7）。在老化之前和之后评估较高的显微硬度。为了比较不同厚度的效果，在老化之前，根据显微硬度测量对样品的底表面进行评估。另外，在老化之前和之后，在SEM中分析上表面。结果所有样品的上表面值均高于下值（p <0.05）。在两种材料中，清漆样品和非清漆样品之间没有显着差异（p> 0.05）。尽管在某些组中这种增加并不明显，但是温度变化会增加两种材料的表面显微硬度值，除了未曝光上光的EF样品。在未老化的EF（125.6±6.79）和未油漆的GCP（88.1±7.59）样品中记录了最高的显微硬度值，这些样品在老化前进行了90 s的热光固化。底部硬度值受GCP和EF材料厚度变化的影响（p <0.05）。老化后样品的变形和微裂纹在所有材料中都比以前更大。在90秒钟内对样品进行热光固化，可以减少材料在老化前后的裂纹。结论热老化不利地影响了材料的显微硬度，这对于临床成功至关重要。热光固化工艺提高了GCP组的显微硬度，而无需施加清漆。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。老化后样品的变形和微裂纹在所有材料中都比以前更大。在90秒钟内对样品进行热光固化，可以减少材料在老化前后的裂纹。结论热老化不利地影响了材料的显微硬度，这对于临床成功至关重要。热光固化工艺提高了GCP组的显微硬度，而无需施加清漆。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。老化后样品的变形和微裂纹在所有材料中都比以前更大。在90秒钟内对样品进行热光固化，可以减少材料在老化前后的裂纹。结论热老化不利地影响了材料的显微硬度，这对于临床成功至关重要。热光固化工艺提高了GCP组的显微硬度，而无需施加清漆。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。在90秒钟内对样品进行热光固化，可以减少材料在老化前后的裂纹。结论热老化不利地影响了材料的显微硬度，这对于临床成功至关重要。热光固化工艺提高了GCP组的显微硬度，而无需施加清漆。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。在90秒钟内对样品进行热光固化，可以减少材料在老化前后的裂纹。结论热老化不利地影响了材料的显微硬度，这对于临床成功至关重要。热光固化工艺无需涂覆清漆即可改善GCP组的显微硬度。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。热光固化工艺提高了GCP组的显微硬度，而无需施加清漆。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。热光固化工艺无需涂覆清漆即可改善GCP组的显微硬度。清漆的应用增加了EF组的显微硬度，而无需进行热光固化。底表面的显微硬度随厚度的增加而降低。热光固化并未增加所有样品的底表面显微硬度。