Krishna Kishore Kadiyala1, Mohan Krishna Badisa2, Gopinadh Anne1, Sampath Chowdary Anche3, Sandeep Chiramana1, Suresh Babu Muvva3, Srujana Zakkula4, Ravi Rakesh Dev Jyothula4. 1. Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India . 2. Postgraduate Student, Department of Prosthodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India . 3. Reader, Department of Prosthodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India . 4. Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Provisional restoration is an analytical component of fixed prosthodontics serving as a ground plan for the design of fixed dental prosthesis. Flexural strength is critical in case of long standing fixed dental prosthesis, to appreciate success of full mouth rehabilitation cases and temporomandibular joint dysfunction therapies. AIM: The present study was to evaluate the flexural strength of different provisional restorative resins used for prosthetic rehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty identical samples (n=10 for each material) measuring 25mm×2mm×2mm according to ADA/ANSI specification no. 27 were fabricated using autopolymerizing Poly Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA) (Group A); heat activated PMMA (Group B); autopolymerizing Bis-GMA composite resin (Group C) and light activated Urethane Dimethacrylate Resin (UDMA) (Group D). For 14 days all these samples were stored in artificial saliva. Ten samples from each material were subjected to thermal cycling for 2500 cycles (5°C to 55°C). Later, a standard three point bending test was conducted on all the specimens with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75mm/min. Statistical analysis used included Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The mean flexural strength of specimens confirmed higher flexural strength for Group C (102.98 Mpa) followed by Group B (91.86 Mpa), Group A (79.13 Mpa) and Group D (60.01 Mpa). There were significant differences between any two materials tested (p <0.05). Comparison between mean flexural strength values between four groups revealed significant difference between the interim materials (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: The greatest flexural strength was observed for Bis-GMA composite resins followed by heat cure methacrylate resins, autopolymerizing methacrylate resins and was least for light cure resins. While fabricating provisional restorations, these greater values should be considered for better outcome of the treatment.
INTRODUCTION: Provisional restoration is an analytical component of fixed prosthodontics serving as a ground plan for the design of fixed dental prosthesis. Flexural strength is critical in case of long standing fixed dental prosthesis, to appreciate success of full mouth rehabilitation cases and temporomandibular joint dysfunction therapies. AIM: The present study was to evaluate the flexural strength of different provisional restorative resins used for prosthetic rehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty identical samples (n=10 for each material) measuring 25mm×2mm×2mm according to ADA/ANSI specification no. 27 were fabricated using autopolymerizing Poly Methyl Methacrylate (PMMA) (Group A); heat activated PMMA (Group B); autopolymerizing Bis-GMA composite resin (Group C) and light activated Urethane Dimethacrylate Resin (UDMA) (Group D). For 14 days all these samples were stored in artificial saliva. Ten samples from each material were subjected to thermal cycling for 2500 cycles (5°C to 55°C). Later, a standard three point bending test was conducted on all the specimens with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75mm/min. Statistical analysis used included Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The mean flexural strength of specimens confirmed higher flexural strength for Group C (102.98 Mpa) followed by Group B (91.86 Mpa), Group A (79.13 Mpa) and Group D (60.01 Mpa). There were significant differences between any two materials tested (p <0.05). Comparison between mean flexural strength values between four groups revealed significant difference between the interim materials (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: The greatest flexural strength was observed for Bis-GMA composite resins followed by heat cure methacrylate resins, autopolymerizing methacrylate resins and was least for light cure resins. While fabricating provisional restorations, these greater values should be considered for better outcome of the treatment.
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
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