Cargando…
A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study
AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) resin using different types of reinforcement materials to determine the best among them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty samples were made (10...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5601501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28936046 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_79_17 |
_version_ | 1783264398063697920 |
---|---|
author | Gupt, Parikshit Nagpal, Archana Samra, Rupandeep Kaur Verma, Ramit Kaur, Jasjeet Abrol, Surbhi |
author_facet | Gupt, Parikshit Nagpal, Archana Samra, Rupandeep Kaur Verma, Ramit Kaur, Jasjeet Abrol, Surbhi |
author_sort | Gupt, Parikshit |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) resin using different types of reinforcement materials to determine the best among them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty samples were made (10 samples for each group) with autopolymerizing PMMA resin using reinforcement materials (stainless steel wire: looped and unlooped and glass fiber: loose and unidirectional) as 3-unit posterior bridge. The test specimens were divided into five groups depending on the reinforcing material as Group I, II, III, IV, and V; Group I: PMMA unreinforced (control group), Group II: PMMA reinforced with stainless steel wire (straight ends), Group III: PMMA reinforced with stainless steel wire (looped ends), Group IV: PMMA reinforced with unidirectional glass fibers, and Group V: PMMA reinforced with randomly distributed glass fibers. Universal testing machine was used to evaluate and compare the fracture strength of samples. Comparison of mean ultimate force and ultimate stress was done employing one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc tests. RESULTS: The highest and lowest mean ultimate force and mean ultimate stress were of Group IV and I, respectively. Tukey's post hoc honestly significant difference multiple comparison for mean ultimate force and stress shows the increase in strength to be statistically significant (P < 0.05) except for the samples reinforced with randomly distributed glass fibers (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Unidirectional glass fibers showed the maximum strength, which was comparable to mean values of both stainless steel wire groups. Low cost and easy technique of using stainless steel wire make it the material of choice over the unidirectional glass fiber for reinforcement in nonesthetic areas where high strength is required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5601501 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56015012018-07-01 A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study Gupt, Parikshit Nagpal, Archana Samra, Rupandeep Kaur Verma, Ramit Kaur, Jasjeet Abrol, Surbhi J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) resin using different types of reinforcement materials to determine the best among them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty samples were made (10 samples for each group) with autopolymerizing PMMA resin using reinforcement materials (stainless steel wire: looped and unlooped and glass fiber: loose and unidirectional) as 3-unit posterior bridge. The test specimens were divided into five groups depending on the reinforcing material as Group I, II, III, IV, and V; Group I: PMMA unreinforced (control group), Group II: PMMA reinforced with stainless steel wire (straight ends), Group III: PMMA reinforced with stainless steel wire (looped ends), Group IV: PMMA reinforced with unidirectional glass fibers, and Group V: PMMA reinforced with randomly distributed glass fibers. Universal testing machine was used to evaluate and compare the fracture strength of samples. Comparison of mean ultimate force and ultimate stress was done employing one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc tests. RESULTS: The highest and lowest mean ultimate force and mean ultimate stress were of Group IV and I, respectively. Tukey's post hoc honestly significant difference multiple comparison for mean ultimate force and stress shows the increase in strength to be statistically significant (P < 0.05) except for the samples reinforced with randomly distributed glass fibers (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Unidirectional glass fibers showed the maximum strength, which was comparable to mean values of both stainless steel wire groups. Low cost and easy technique of using stainless steel wire make it the material of choice over the unidirectional glass fiber for reinforcement in nonesthetic areas where high strength is required. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5601501/ /pubmed/28936046 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_79_17 Text en Copyright: © 2017 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Gupt, Parikshit Nagpal, Archana Samra, Rupandeep Kaur Verma, Ramit Kaur, Jasjeet Abrol, Surbhi A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title | A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title_full | A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title_fullStr | A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title_short | A comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: An in vitro study |
title_sort | comparative study to check fracture strength of provisional fixed partial dentures made of autopolymerizing polymethylmethacrylate resin reinforced with different materials: an in vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5601501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28936046 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_79_17 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guptparikshit acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT nagpalarchana acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT samrarupandeepkaur acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT vermaramit acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT kaurjasjeet acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT abrolsurbhi acomparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT guptparikshit comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT nagpalarchana comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT samrarupandeepkaur comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT vermaramit comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT kaurjasjeet comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy AT abrolsurbhi comparativestudytocheckfracturestrengthofprovisionalfixedpartialdenturesmadeofautopolymerizingpolymethylmethacrylateresinreinforcedwithdifferentmaterialsaninvitrostudy |