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

Ha SR, Yang JH, Lee JB, Han JS, Kim SH - J Adv Prosthodont (2010)

Bottom Line: There were statistically significant differences among the dimethacrylate-based materials.Protemp 3 Garant showed the highest value.The dimethacrylate-based temporary materials tested were stronger in diametral tensile strength than the monomethacrylate-based one.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ajou University, Suwon, Korea.

ABSTRACT

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.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Dimension of cylinder-shaped specimen. φ = 4 mm, L = 6 mm, P = load.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2984512&req=5

Figure 1: Dimension of cylinder-shaped specimen. φ = 4 mm, L = 6 mm, P = load.

Mentions: Polymer-based crown and fixed partial denture materials used in this study are presented in Table I. Specimens of the four materials were prepared in a cylindrical stainless steel mould which could be split so that no force would be required to remove the set specimen from the mould. The specimens had a size of 4 mm in diameter and 6 mm in length (Fig. 1). Protemp 3 Garant (PT3), Fast set Temphase (TMP) and Luxatemp (LXT) were injected into the mould with the automixing gun applicator, while Trim (TRM) was mixed with a clean plastic spatula for 30 seconds and immediately placed into the mould. The mould was covered with a glass slab and a plastic strip to prevent the inhibition of polymerization by oxygen, and hand pressure was applied to create flat end surfaces. After setting of the material, the mould was disassembled and the specimen was removed gently from the mould. For each material, twenty specimens were fabricated and randomly divided into two groups of ten according to the measurement time after completion of mixing.


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

Ha SR, Yang JH, Lee JB, Han JS, Kim SH - J Adv Prosthodont (2010)

Dimension of cylinder-shaped specimen. φ = 4 mm, L = 6 mm, P = load.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2984512&req=5

Figure 1: Dimension of cylinder-shaped specimen. φ = 4 mm, L = 6 mm, P = load.
Mentions: Polymer-based crown and fixed partial denture materials used in this study are presented in Table I. Specimens of the four materials were prepared in a cylindrical stainless steel mould which could be split so that no force would be required to remove the set specimen from the mould. The specimens had a size of 4 mm in diameter and 6 mm in length (Fig. 1). Protemp 3 Garant (PT3), Fast set Temphase (TMP) and Luxatemp (LXT) were injected into the mould with the automixing gun applicator, while Trim (TRM) was mixed with a clean plastic spatula for 30 seconds and immediately placed into the mould. The mould was covered with a glass slab and a plastic strip to prevent the inhibition of polymerization by oxygen, and hand pressure was applied to create flat end surfaces. After setting of the material, the mould was disassembled and the specimen was removed gently from the mould. For each material, twenty specimens were fabricated and randomly divided into two groups of ten according to the measurement time after completion of mixing.

Bottom Line: There were statistically significant differences among the dimethacrylate-based materials.Protemp 3 Garant showed the highest value.The dimethacrylate-based temporary materials tested were stronger in diametral tensile strength than the monomethacrylate-based one.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ajou University, Suwon, Korea.

ABSTRACT

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.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus