Asude Yilmaz1, Seyfettin Baydaş. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Atatürk, Erzurum, Turkey. yyilmaz25@atauni.edu.tr
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the fracture resistance of various provisional crown materials using an in vitro model test system. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the present study polycarbonate crowns, prefabricated by the manufacturer (3M Polycarbonate Crown), and the temporary crowns, fabricated in the dental laboratory environment, were fabricated using bis-acryl composite (Protemp II), autopolymerizing PMMA resin (BISICO Temp S), and heat-polymerized PMMA resin (Major C&B-V Dentine). All temporary crowns were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at room temperature prior to testing. The crowns were seated on metal dies, fabricated from Cr-Co alloy (AZ Dental, Konstanz, Germany), and then tested using the indenter of a Hounsfield testing machine (Hounsfield Tensometer, Hounsfield Test Equipment, Raydon, England). The tip of the indenter was located at a position one-third of the way down the inciso-palatine surface at 135 masculine. The data were statistically analyzed for differences using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey HSD test (P < .05). Additionally, the types of failure obtained from the fracture load test were examined using 10x magnification with a stereo microscope. RESULTS: The results of the present study indicated polycarbonate crowns were significantly different from the BISICO Temp S, Protemp II, and Major C&B-V Dentine (P < .05) groups. CONCLUSION: This in vitro study shows polycarbonate crowns may be preferable to the other types of temporary crowns used in this study.
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the fracture resistance of various provisional crown materials using an in vitro model test system. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the present study polycarbonate crowns, prefabricated by the manufacturer (3M Polycarbonate Crown), and the temporary crowns, fabricated in the dental laboratory environment, were fabricated using bis-acryl composite (Protemp II), autopolymerizing PMMA resin (BISICO Temp S), and heat-polymerized PMMA resin (Major C&B-V Dentine). All temporary crowns were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at room temperature prior to testing. The crowns were seated on metal dies, fabricated from Cr-Co alloy (AZ Dental, Konstanz, Germany), and then tested using the indenter of a Hounsfield testing machine (Hounsfield Tensometer, Hounsfield Test Equipment, Raydon, England). The tip of the indenter was located at a position one-third of the way down the inciso-palatine surface at 135 masculine. The data were statistically analyzed for differences using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey HSD test (P < .05). Additionally, the types of failure obtained from the fracture load test were examined using 10x magnification with a stereo microscope. RESULTS: The results of the present study indicated polycarbonate crowns were significantly different from the BISICO Temp S, Protemp II, and Major C&B-V Dentine (P < .05) groups. CONCLUSION: This in vitro study shows polycarbonate crowns may be preferable to the other types of temporary crowns used in this study.
Authors: Mihaela Pantea; Robert Cătălin Ciocoiu; Maria Greabu; Alexandra Ripszky Totan; Marina Imre; Ana Maria Cristina Țâncu; Ruxandra Sfeatcu; Tudor Claudiu Spînu; Radu Ilinca; Alexandru Eugen Petre Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-04-23 Impact factor: 3.748
Authors: Ali Alrahlah; Rawaiz Khan; Fahim Vohra; Ibrahim M Alqahtani; Adel A Alruhaymi; Sajjad Haider; Abdel-Basit Al-Odayni; Waseem Sharaf Saeed; H C Ananda Murthy; Leonel S Bautista Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 3.246