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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |