Sang-Hui Yu1, Hye-Won Cho2, Seunghan Oh3, Ji-Myung Bae4. 1. Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Dental Biomaterials and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, College of Dentistry and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea. 2. Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, College of Dentistry and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Dental Biomaterials and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, College of Dentistry and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea. 4. Professor, Department of Dental Biomaterials and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, College of Dentistry and Institute of Biomaterials-Implant, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea. Electronic address: baejimy@wku.ac.kr.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: No study has yet evaluated the strength of complete dentures reinforced with glass fiber meshes with different content and structures. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the reinforcing effects of glass fiber mesh with different content and structures with that of metal mesh in complete dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two types of glass fiber mesh were used: SES mesh (SES) and glass cloth (GC2, GC3, and GC4). A metal mesh was used for comparison. The complete dentures were made by placing the reinforcement 1 mm away from the tissue surface. A control group was prepared without any reinforcement (n=10). The compressive properties were measured by a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min. The results were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and the Duncan multiple range test (α=.05). RESULTS: The fracture resistance of the SES group was significantly higher than that of the control, GC4, and metal groups (asymptotic P=.004), but not significantly different from the GC2 and GC3 groups. The toughness of the SES and GC3 groups was significantly higher than that of the others (asymptotic P<.001), but not significantly different from that of the GC4 group. CONCLUSIONS: SES and GC3, which have different structures but similar volume content, were the most effective in reinforcing complete dentures. The content of the glass fiber mesh seemed more important than the structures.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: No study has yet evaluated the strength of complete dentures reinforced with glass fiber meshes with different content and structures. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the reinforcing effects of glass fiber mesh with different content and structures with that of metal mesh in complete dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two types of glass fiber mesh were used: SES mesh (SES) and glass cloth (GC2, GC3, and GC4). A metal mesh was used for comparison. The complete dentures were made by placing the reinforcement 1 mm away from the tissue surface. A control group was prepared without any reinforcement (n=10). The compressive properties were measured by a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min. The results were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and the Duncan multiple range test (α=.05). RESULTS: The fracture resistance of the SES group was significantly higher than that of the control, GC4, and metal groups (asymptotic P=.004), but not significantly different from the GC2 and GC3 groups. The toughness of the SES and GC3 groups was significantly higher than that of the others (asymptotic P<.001), but not significantly different from that of the GC4 group. CONCLUSIONS:SES and GC3, which have different structures but similar volume content, were the most effective in reinforcing complete dentures. The content of the glass fiber mesh seemed more important than the structures.