The effect of different fiber reinforcements on flexural strength of provisional restorative resins: An in-vitro study
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE.The aim of this study was to compare the flexural strength of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and bis-acryl composite resin reinforced with polyethylene and glass fibers. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three groups of rectangular test specimens (n = 15) of each of the two resin/fiber reinforcement were prepared for flexural strength test and unreinforced group served as the control. Specimens were loaded in a universal testing machine until fracture. The mean flexural strengths (MPa) was compared by one way ANOVA test, followed by Scheffe analysis, using a significance level of 0.05. Flexural strength between fiber-reinforced resin groups were compared by independent samples t-test. RESULTS. For control groups, the flexural strength for PMMA (215.53 MPa) was significantly lower than for bis-acryl composite resin (240.09 MPa). Glass fiber reinforcement produced significantly higher flexural strength for both PMMA (267.01 MPa) and bis-acryl composite resin (305.65 MPa), but the polyethylene fibers showed no significant difference (PMMA resin- 218.55 MPa and bis-acryl composite resin-241.66 MPa). Among the reinforced groups, silane impregnated glass fibers showed highest flexural strength for bis-acryl composite resin (305.65 MPa). CONCLUSION. Of two fiber reinforcement methods evaluated, glass fiber reinforcement for the PMMA resin and bis-acryl composite resin materials produced highest flexural strength. Clinical implications. On the basis of this in-vitro study, the use of glass and polyethylene fibers may be an effective way to reinforce provisional restorative resins. When esthetics and space are of concern, glass fiber seems to be the most appropriate method for reinforcing provisional restorative resins.
Abstract
PURPOSE.The aim of this study was to compare the flexural strength of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and bis-acryl composite resin reinforced with polyethylene and glass fibers. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three groups of rectangular test specimens (n = 15) of each of the two resin/fiber reinforcement were prepared for flexural strength test and unreinforced group served as the control. Specimens were loaded in a universal testing machine until fracture. The mean flexural strengths (MPa) was compared by one way ANOVA test, followed by Scheffe analysis, using a significance level of 0.05. Flexural strength between fiber-reinforced resin groups were compared by independent samples t-test. RESULTS. For control groups, the flexural strength for PMMA (215.53 MPa) was significantly lower than for bis-acryl composite resin (240.09 MPa). Glass fiber reinforcement produced significantly higher flexural strength for both PMMA (267.01 MPa) and bis-acryl composite resin (305.65 MPa), but the polyethylene fibers showed no significant difference (PMMA resin- 218.55 MPa and bis-acryl composite resin-241.66 MPa). Among the reinforced groups, silane impregnated glass fibers showed highest flexural strength for bis-acryl composite resin (305.65 MPa). CONCLUSION. Of two fiber reinforcement methods evaluated, glass fiber reinforcement for the PMMA resin and bis-acryl composite resin materials produced highest flexural strength. Clinical implications. On the basis of this in-vitro study, the use of glass and polyethylene fibers may be an effective way to reinforce provisional restorative resins. When esthetics and space are of concern, glass fiber seems to be the most appropriate method for reinforcing provisional restorative resins.
참고문헌 (14)
- Rosenstiel SF, "Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed", pp.380~386 (2001), Mosby
- Osman YI, "Flexural strength of provisional restorative materials", J Prosthet Dent, 70, pp.94~96 (1993)
- Haselton DR, "Flexural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins", J Prosthet Dent, 87, pp.225~228 (2002)
- Hamza TA, "The effect of fiber reinforcement on the fracture toughness and flexural strength of provisional restorative resins", J Prosthet Dent, 91, pp.258~264 (2004)
- Vallittu PK., "Flexural properties of acrylic resin polymers reinforced with unidirectional and woven glass fibers", J Prosthet Dent, 81, pp.318~326 (1998)
- Solnit GS, "The effect of methyl methacrylate reinforcement with silane-treated and untreated glass fibers", J Prosthet Dent, 66, pp.310~314 (1991)
- Dagar S, "An in-vitro evaluation of flex6 ural strength of direct and indirect provisionalization materials", J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 5, pp.132~135 (2005)
- Uzun G, "Effect of five woven fiber reinforcements on the impact and transverse strength of a denture base resin", J Prosthet Dent, 81, pp.616~620 (1999)
- Gutteridge DL, "The effect of including ultra-high-modulus polyethylene fibre on the impact strength of acrylic resin", Br Dent J, 164, pp.177~180 (1988)
- Koumjian JH, "Evaluation of fracture resistance of resins used for provisional restorations", J Prosthet Dent, 64, pp.654~657 (1990)
- Geerts GA, "The effect of different reinforcements on the fracture toughness of materials for interim restorations", J Prosthet Dent, 99, pp.461~467 (2008)
- Vallittu PK, "Ultra-high-modulus polyethylene ribbon as reinforcement for denture polymethyl methacrylate: a short communication", Dent Mater, 13, pp.381~382 (1997)
- Kolbeck C, "In vitro study of fracture strength and marginal adaptation of polyethylene- fibre-reinforced-composite versus glass-fiber-reinforcedcomposite fixed partial dentures", J Oral Rehabil, 29, pp.668~674 (2002)
- Stipho HD, "Effect of glass fiber reinforcement on some mechanical properties of autopolymerizing polymethyl methacrylate", J Prosthet Dent, 79, pp.580~584 (1998)