Cargando…

Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to compare clinical performance and in vitro wear of temporary CAD/CAM and cartridge crowns. This study is an approach to estimate the influence of in vivo use and laboratory simulation on temporary crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 90 crowns were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sari, Tuğrul, Usumez, Aslihan, Strasser, Thomas, Şahinbas, Abdurrahman, Rosentritt, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8275555/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32583239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03278-5
_version_ 1783721740431523840
author Sari, Tuğrul
Usumez, Aslihan
Strasser, Thomas
Şahinbas, Abdurrahman
Rosentritt, Martin
author_facet Sari, Tuğrul
Usumez, Aslihan
Strasser, Thomas
Şahinbas, Abdurrahman
Rosentritt, Martin
author_sort Sari, Tuğrul
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to compare clinical performance and in vitro wear of temporary CAD/CAM and cartridge crowns. This study is an approach to estimate the influence of in vivo use and laboratory simulation on temporary crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 90 crowns were fabricated from each temporary CAD/CAM or cartridge material. Also, 10 crowns of each material were clinically applied for 14 days, and 80 identical duplicate restorations were investigated in the laboratory after storage in water (14 days; 37 °C) and subsequent thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML, 240.000 × 50N ML, 600 × 5°C/55 °C). After in vivo application or in vitro aging, facture force, superficial wear (mean and maximum), surface roughness (Ra, Rz), thermal weight loss (TGA), and heat of reaction (DSC) were determined for all crowns. Statistics: Bonferroni post hoc test; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); α = 0.05). RESULTS: The fracture resistance of the temporary materials varied between 1196.4 (CAD in vivo) and 1598.3 N (cartridge crown in vitro). Mean (maximum) wear data between 204.7 (386.7 μm; cartridge in vitro) and 353.0 μm (621.8 μm; CAD in vitro) were found. Ra values ranged between 4.4 and 4.9 μm and Rz values between 36.0 and 40.8 μm. DSC and TG analysis revealed small differences between the materials but a strong influence of the aging process. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of in vivo and in vitro aging led to no significant differences in fracture force and wear but differences in roughness, DSC, and TGA. SEM evaluation confirmed comparability. Comparison of CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials partially showed significant differences. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In vitro aging methods might be helpful to estimate materials’ properties before principal clinical application. CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials provided comparable good clinical performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8275555
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82755552021-07-20 Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance Sari, Tuğrul Usumez, Aslihan Strasser, Thomas Şahinbas, Abdurrahman Rosentritt, Martin Clin Oral Investig Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this investigation was to compare clinical performance and in vitro wear of temporary CAD/CAM and cartridge crowns. This study is an approach to estimate the influence of in vivo use and laboratory simulation on temporary crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 90 crowns were fabricated from each temporary CAD/CAM or cartridge material. Also, 10 crowns of each material were clinically applied for 14 days, and 80 identical duplicate restorations were investigated in the laboratory after storage in water (14 days; 37 °C) and subsequent thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML, 240.000 × 50N ML, 600 × 5°C/55 °C). After in vivo application or in vitro aging, facture force, superficial wear (mean and maximum), surface roughness (Ra, Rz), thermal weight loss (TGA), and heat of reaction (DSC) were determined for all crowns. Statistics: Bonferroni post hoc test; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); α = 0.05). RESULTS: The fracture resistance of the temporary materials varied between 1196.4 (CAD in vivo) and 1598.3 N (cartridge crown in vitro). Mean (maximum) wear data between 204.7 (386.7 μm; cartridge in vitro) and 353.0 μm (621.8 μm; CAD in vitro) were found. Ra values ranged between 4.4 and 4.9 μm and Rz values between 36.0 and 40.8 μm. DSC and TG analysis revealed small differences between the materials but a strong influence of the aging process. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of in vivo and in vitro aging led to no significant differences in fracture force and wear but differences in roughness, DSC, and TGA. SEM evaluation confirmed comparability. Comparison of CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials partially showed significant differences. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In vitro aging methods might be helpful to estimate materials’ properties before principal clinical application. CAD/CAM and cartridge temporary materials provided comparable good clinical performance. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-24 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC8275555/ /pubmed/32583239 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03278-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020, corrected publication 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Sari, Tuğrul
Usumez, Aslihan
Strasser, Thomas
Şahinbas, Abdurrahman
Rosentritt, Martin
Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title_full Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title_fullStr Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title_full_unstemmed Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title_short Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
title_sort temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8275555/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32583239
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03278-5
work_keys_str_mv AT saritugrul temporarymaterialscomparisonofinvivoandinvitroperformance
AT usumezaslihan temporarymaterialscomparisonofinvivoandinvitroperformance
AT strasserthomas temporarymaterialscomparisonofinvivoandinvitroperformance
AT sahinbasabdurrahman temporarymaterialscomparisonofinvivoandinvitroperformance
AT rosentrittmartin temporarymaterialscomparisonofinvivoandinvitroperformance