Cargando…

Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the diametral tensile strength of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture (FPD) materials, and the change of the diametral tensile strength with time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One monomethacrylate-based temporary crown and FPD materi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ha, Seung-Ryong, Yang, Jae-Ho, Lee, Jai-Bong, Han, Jung-Suk, Kim, Sung-Hun
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2984512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21165182
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.1.14
_version_ 1782192107651334144
author Ha, Seung-Ryong
Yang, Jae-Ho
Lee, Jai-Bong
Han, Jung-Suk
Kim, Sung-Hun
author_facet Ha, Seung-Ryong
Yang, Jae-Ho
Lee, Jai-Bong
Han, Jung-Suk
Kim, Sung-Hun
author_sort Ha, Seung-Ryong
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the diametral tensile strength of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture (FPD) materials, and the change of the diametral tensile strength with time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One monomethacrylate-based temporary crown and FPD material (Trim) and three dimethacrylate-based ones (Protemp 3 Garant, Temphase, Luxtemp) were investigated. 20 specimens (ø 4 mm × 6 mm) were fabricated and randomly divided into two groups (Group I: Immediately, Group II: 1 hour) according to the measurement time after completion of mixing. Universal Testing Machine was used to load the specimens at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, the multiple comparison Scheffe test and independent sample t test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Trim showed severe permanent deformation without an obvious fracture during loading at both times. There were statistically significant differences among the dimethacrylate-based materials. The dimethacrylate-based materials presented an increase in strength from 5 minutes to 1 hour and were as follows: Protemp 3 Garant (23.16 - 37.6 MPa), Temphase (22.27 - 28.08 MPa), Luxatemp (14.46 - 20.59 MPa). Protemp 3 Garant showed the highest value. CONCLUSION: The dimethacrylate-based temporary materials tested were stronger in diametral tensile strength than the monomethacrylate-based one. The diametral tensile strength of the materials investigated increased with time.
format Text
id pubmed-2984512
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29845122010-12-16 Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength Ha, Seung-Ryong Yang, Jae-Ho Lee, Jai-Bong Han, Jung-Suk Kim, Sung-Hun J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the diametral tensile strength of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture (FPD) materials, and the change of the diametral tensile strength with time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One monomethacrylate-based temporary crown and FPD material (Trim) and three dimethacrylate-based ones (Protemp 3 Garant, Temphase, Luxtemp) were investigated. 20 specimens (ø 4 mm × 6 mm) were fabricated and randomly divided into two groups (Group I: Immediately, Group II: 1 hour) according to the measurement time after completion of mixing. Universal Testing Machine was used to load the specimens at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, the multiple comparison Scheffe test and independent sample t test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Trim showed severe permanent deformation without an obvious fracture during loading at both times. There were statistically significant differences among the dimethacrylate-based materials. The dimethacrylate-based materials presented an increase in strength from 5 minutes to 1 hour and were as follows: Protemp 3 Garant (23.16 - 37.6 MPa), Temphase (22.27 - 28.08 MPa), Luxatemp (14.46 - 20.59 MPa). Protemp 3 Garant showed the highest value. CONCLUSION: The dimethacrylate-based temporary materials tested were stronger in diametral tensile strength than the monomethacrylate-based one. The diametral tensile strength of the materials investigated increased with time. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2010-03 2010-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC2984512/ /pubmed/21165182 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.1.14 Text en Copyright © 2010 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ha, Seung-Ryong
Yang, Jae-Ho
Lee, Jai-Bong
Han, Jung-Suk
Kim, Sung-Hun
Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title_full Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title_fullStr Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title_short Comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
title_sort comparison of polymer-based temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials by diametral tensile strength
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2984512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21165182
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.1.14
work_keys_str_mv AT haseungryong comparisonofpolymerbasedtemporarycrownandfixedpartialdenturematerialsbydiametraltensilestrength
AT yangjaeho comparisonofpolymerbasedtemporarycrownandfixedpartialdenturematerialsbydiametraltensilestrength
AT leejaibong comparisonofpolymerbasedtemporarycrownandfixedpartialdenturematerialsbydiametraltensilestrength
AT hanjungsuk comparisonofpolymerbasedtemporarycrownandfixedpartialdenturematerialsbydiametraltensilestrength
AT kimsunghun comparisonofpolymerbasedtemporarycrownandfixedpartialdenturematerialsbydiametraltensilestrength