Comparison of fracture strength after thermo-mechanical aging between provisional crowns made with CAD/CAM and conventional method
2
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the fracture strength and fracture patterns of provisional crowns fabricated from different materials and techniques after receiving stress from a simulated oral condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A monomethacrylate-based resin (Unifast Trad) and a bis-acryl-based (Protemp 4) resin were used to fabricate provisional crowns using conventional direct technique. A milled monomethacrylate resin (Brylic Solid) and a 3D-printed bis-acrylate resin (Freeprint Temp) were chosen to fabricate provisional crowns using the CAD/CAM process. All cemented provisional crowns (n=10/group) were subjected to thermal cycling (5,000 cycles at 5°-55 C) and cyclic occlusal load (100 N at 4 Hz for 100,000 cycles). Maximum force at fracture was tested using a universal testing machine. RESULTS. Maximum force at fracture (mean ± SD, N) of each group was 657.87 ± 82.84 for Unifast Trad, 1125.94 ± 168.07 for Protemp4, 953.60 ± 58.88 for Brylic Solid, and 1004.19 ± 122.18 for Freeprint Temp. One-way ANOVA with Tamhane post hoc test showed that the fracture strength of Unifast Trad was statistically significantly lower than others (P<.01). No statistically significant difference was noted among other groups. For failure pattern analysis, Unifast Trad and Brylic Solid showed less damage than Protemp 4 and Freeprint Temp groups. CONCLUSION. Provisional crowns fabricated using the CAD/CAM process and the conventionally fabricated bis-acryl resins exhibited significant higher fracture strength compared to conventionally fabricated monomethacrylate resins after the aging regimen. Therefore, CAD/CAM milling and 3D printing of provisional restorations may be good alternatives for long term provisionalization.
Abstract
PURPOSE. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the fracture strength and fracture patterns of provisional crowns fabricated from different materials and techniques after receiving stress from a simulated oral condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A monomethacrylate-based resin (Unifast Trad) and a bis-acryl-based (Protemp 4) resin were used to fabricate provisional crowns using conventional direct technique. A milled monomethacrylate resin (Brylic Solid) and a 3D-printed bis-acrylate resin (Freeprint Temp) were chosen to fabricate provisional crowns using the CAD/CAM process. All cemented provisional crowns (n=10/group) were subjected to thermal cycling (5,000 cycles at 5°-55 C) and cyclic occlusal load (100 N at 4 Hz for 100,000 cycles). Maximum force at fracture was tested using a universal testing machine. RESULTS. Maximum force at fracture (mean ± SD, N) of each group was 657.87 ± 82.84 for Unifast Trad, 1125.94 ± 168.07 for Protemp4, 953.60 ± 58.88 for Brylic Solid, and 1004.19 ± 122.18 for Freeprint Temp. One-way ANOVA with Tamhane post hoc test showed that the fracture strength of Unifast Trad was statistically significantly lower than others (P<.01). No statistically significant difference was noted among other groups. For failure pattern analysis, Unifast Trad and Brylic Solid showed less damage than Protemp 4 and Freeprint Temp groups. CONCLUSION. Provisional crowns fabricated using the CAD/CAM process and the conventionally fabricated bis-acryl resins exhibited significant higher fracture strength compared to conventionally fabricated monomethacrylate resins after the aging regimen. Therefore, CAD/CAM milling and 3D printing of provisional restorations may be good alternatives for long term provisionalization.
참고문헌 (27)
- Burns DR, "A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics", J Prosthet Dent, 90, pp.474~497 (2003)
- Haselton DR, "Flexural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins", J Prosthet Dent, 87, pp.225~228 (2002)
- Astudillo-Rubio D, "Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials : A systematic review and meta-analysis", PLoS One, 13, pp.e0193162~ (2018)
- Abdulmohsen B, "A study to investigate and compare the physicomechanical properties of experimental and commercial temporary crown and bridge materials", Dent Mater, 32, pp.200~210 (2016)
- Alp G, "Comparison of flexural strength of different CAD", CAM PMMA-based polymers, 2019, pp.28, e491~e495
- Lang R, "Fracture resistance of PMMA and resin matrix composite-based interim FPD materials", Int J Prosthodont, 16, pp.381~384 (2003)
- Nejatidanesh F, "Flexural strength of interim resin materials for fixed prosthodontics", J Prosthodont, 18, pp.507~511 (2009)
- van Noort R, "The future of dental devices is digital", Dent Mater, 28, pp.3~12 (2012)
- Alghazzawi TF, "Advancements in CAD", CAM technology : options for practical implementation, 2016, pp.60, 72~84
- Digholkar S, "Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods", J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 16, pp.328~334 (2016)
- Rayyan MM, "Comparison of interim restorations fabricated by CAD", CAM with those fabricated manually, 2015, pp.114, 414~419
- Yao J, "Comparison of the flexural strength and marginal accuracy of traditional and CAD", CAM interim materials before and after thermal cycling, 2014, pp.112, 649~657
- Isil Karaokutan, "In vitro study of fracture strength of provisional crown materials", The Journal of Advanced of Prosthodontics, 7(1), pp.27~31 (2015), 대한치과보철학회[DOI]
- Tahayeri A, "3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials", Dent Mater, 34, pp.192~200 (2018)
- Alt V, "Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures : CAD", CAM versus directly fabricated restorations, 2011, pp.27, 339~347
- Abdullah AO, "Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD", CAM vs conventional provisional crowns, 2016, pp.24, 258~263
- Nakamura T, "In vitro study on marginal and internal fit of CAD", CAM all-ceramic crowns, 2005, pp.24, 456~459
- Heintze SD, "Fracture frequency of all-ceramic crowns during dynamic loading in a chewing simulator using different loading and luting protocols", Dent Mater, 24, pp.1352~1361 (2008)
- Burke FJ, "Fracture resistance of teeth restored with dentinbonded crowns constructed in a leucite-reinforced ceramic", Dent Mater, 15, pp.359~362 (1999)
- Balkenhol M, "Fracture toughness of cross-linked and non-cross-linked temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials", Dent Mater, 25, pp.917~928 (2009)
- Stawarczyk B, "Load-bearing capacity of CAD", CAM milled polymeric three-unit fixed dental prostheses : effect of aging regimens, 2012, pp.16, 1669~1677
- Mei ML, "Effect of heat treatment on the physical properties of provisional crowns during polymerization:an in vitro study", Materials, 8, pp.1766~1777 (2015)
- Edelhoff D, "CAD", CAM-generated high-density polymer restorations for the pretreatment of complex cases : a case report, 2012, pp.43, 457~467
- Giordano R, "Materials for chairside CAD", CAM-produced restorations, 2006, pp.137, 14S~21S
- Balkenhol M, "Correlation between polymerization shrinkage and marginal fit of temporary crowns", Dent Mater, 24, pp.1575~1584 (2008)
- Liebermann A, "Physicomechanical characterization of polyetheretherketone and current esthetic dental CAD", CAM polymers after aging in different storage media, 2016, pp.115, 321~328.e2
- Mandelaris GA, "Guided implant surgery with placement of a presurgical CAD", CAM patient-specific abutment and provisional in the esthetic zone, 2014, pp.35, 494~504