Literature DB >> 26748979

A study to investigate and compare the physicomechanical properties of experimental and commercial temporary crown and bridge materials.

Bana Abdulmohsen1, Sandra Parker2, Michael Braden2, Mangala P Patel2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop two experimental temporary crown and bridge materials with improved physicomechanical properties.
METHODS: Commercial materials: Trim (TR, monomethacrylate, Bosworth) and Quicktemp2 (QT, dimethacrylate, Schottlander). EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS: isobutyl methacrylate/poly(ethyl methacrylate) (IBMA/PEM) and n-butyl methacrylate/PEM (nBMA/PEM), both monomethacrylates. For water absorption/desorption studies rectangular samples (40 mm × 10 mm × 1 mm) of each material were prepared, immersed in deionized water (DW, control) and artificial saliva (AS), and weighed at regular time intervals. %solubility and diffusion coefficients (D) for uptake/loss processes were calculated and compared with theoretical predictions. Polymerization exotherm (cylindrical samples 10 mm × 18 mm) and flexural moduli were measured (three point bending; rectangular samples 80 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm, dry and after 9 days storage in DW). The data were compared statistically.
RESULTS: QT and nBMA/PEM had lower %equilibrium uptakes/loss in DW (0.68%/0.884% and 0.64%/0.895% respectively). QT had the lowest water absorption/desorption D (P<0.05) compared to the three monomethacrylates, in DW and AS. %solubility for all systems showed no differences in DW (P>0.05), but a difference for QT in AS (P<0.05). QT reached its maximum temperature rapidly (∼2 min; 3 monomethacrylates ∼7-13 min). The commercial materials exhibited high peak temperatures (∼51°C, P<0.05; experimental materials ∼43°C). QT had a higher flexural modulus (∼4 GPa; 3 monomethacrylates ∼0.7-1 GPa) for dry and wet samples. The moduli for commercial materials reduced significantly after immersion in DW; there was no difference between the dry and wet experimental materials samples (P>0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: The experimental materials merit further studies since they presented with lower setting exotherms, and contained no phthalate plasticizer, thus being less of a risk to patients.
Copyright © 2015 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffusion coefficient; Equilibrium uptake/loss; Exothermic reaction; Mechanical properties; Plasticizer; Polymers; Provisional restoration materials; Solubility; Temporary crown and bridge materials; Water absorption/desorption

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26748979     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.11.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  4 in total

1.  An Interdisciplinary Study Regarding the Characteristics of Dental Resins Used for Temporary Bridges.

Authors:  Ioana Mârțu; Alice Murariu; Elena Raluca Baciu; Carmen Nicoleta Savin; Iolanda Foia; Monica Tatarciuc; Diana Diaconu-Popa
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 2.948

2.  Temporary materials: comparison of in vivo and in vitro performance.

Authors:  Tuğrul Sari; Aslihan Usumez; Thomas Strasser; Abdurrahman Şahinbas; Martin Rosentritt
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Real-time pulp temperature change at different tooth sites during fabrication of temporary resin crowns.

Authors:  Maykon Dias; Joanne Jung Eun Choi; Caira Ellyse Uy; Rishi Sanjay Ramani; Ritu Ganjigatti; John Neil Waddell
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-12-05

Review 4.  Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Daniela Astudillo-Rubio; Andrés Delgado-Gaete; Carlos Bellot-Arcís; José María Montiel-Company; Agustín Pascual-Moscardó; José Manuel Almerich-Silla
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.