Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Effect of Dietary Simulating Solvents on the Mechanical Properties of Provisional Restorative Materials-An In Vitro Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the mechanical properties of provisional restorative materials after storage in dietary simulating solvents. A total of 120 specimens, 40 specimens each of Luxatemp Star, Revotek LC and DPI Self Cure were prepared. The specimens were divided into four groups with 10 specimens each and stored in dietary simulating solvents for 7 days at 37 °C as follows: Group I—Control, Group II—Artificial saliva, Group III—0.02 N Citric acid and Group IV—Heptane. After 7 days, flexural strength was obtained using universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min and the fractured specimens were immediately subjected to the microhardness test knoop hardness number by using Knoop microhardness tester (10 gm/15 s). The data were analyzed for difference by use of Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn’s multiple comparison tests using a significance level of 0.05 to determine the mean differences. Significant effect was observed on the properties of provisional restorative materials after storage in dietary simulating solvents as compared to the control group (p ≤ 0.05). Bis-acryl resin based Luxatemp Star showed significantly superior flexural strength and hardness as compared to the Revotek LC and DPI Self Cure in dietary simulating solvents. Within the limitations of this study, it may be concluded that dietary simulating solvents showed significant influence on the mechanical properties of the provisional restorative materials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Graph 1
Graph 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Higginbottom FL (1995) Quality provisional restorations: a must for successful restorative dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 16(442):444–447

    Google Scholar 

  2. Akova T, Ozkomur A, Uysal H (2006) Effect of food-simulating liquids on the mechanical properties of provisional restorative materials. Dent Mater 22:1130–1134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gough M (1994) A review of temporary crowns and bridges. Dent Update 21:203–207

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yap AUJ, Mah MKS, Lye CPW, Loh PL (2004) Influence of dietary simulating solvents on the hardness of provisional restorative materials. Dent Mater 20:370–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vahidi F (1987) The provisional restoration. Dent Clin North Am 31:363–381

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Burns DR, Beck DA, Nelson SK (2003) 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 90:474–497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gegauff AG, Holloway JA (2001) Provisional restorations. In: Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J (eds) Contemporary fixed prosthodontics, 3rd edn. Mosby Inc., St. Louis, pp 380–416

    Google Scholar 

  8. Balkenhol M, Mautner MC, Ferger P, Wostmann B (2008) Mechanical properties of provisional crown and bridge materials: chemical-curing versus dual-curing systems. J Dent 36:15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Craig RG (2006) Craig’s restorative dental materials, 12th edn. Mosby Elsevier, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  10. Haselton DR, Diaz Arnold AM, Vargas MA (2002) Flexural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins. J Prosthet Dent 87:225–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ireland MF, Dixon DL, Breeding LC, Ramp MH (1998) In vitro mechanical property comparison of four resins used for fabrication of provisional fixed restorations. J Prosthet Dent 80:158–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Anusavice KJ (2005) Mechanical properties of dental materials. In: Anusavice KJ (ed) Phillips’ science of dental materials, 11th edn. Saunders, St Louis, pp 73–101

    Google Scholar 

  13. El-Ebrashi MK, Craig RG, Peyton FA (1970) Experimental stress analysis of dental restorations. Part VII. Structural design and stress analysis of fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 23:177–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Diaz-Arnold AM, Dunne JT, Jones AH (1999) Microhardness of provisional fixed prosthodontic materials. J Prosthet Dent 82:525–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Asmussen E (1984) Softening of BIS-GMA based polymers by ethanol and by organic acids of plaque. Scand J Dent Res 92:257–261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wu W, Toth EE, Moffa JF, Ellison JA (1984) Subsurface damage layer of in vivo worn dental composite restorations. J Dent Res 63:675–680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Koumjian JH, Nimmo A (1990) Evaluation of fracture resistance of resins used for provisional restorations. J Prosthet Dent 64:654–657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lang R, Rosentritt M, Behr M, Handel G (2003) Fracture resistance of PMMA and resin matrix composite-based interim FPD materials. Int J Prosthodont 16:381–384

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Osman YI, Owen CP (1993) Flexural strength of provisional restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 70:94–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Lang R, Handel G (2004) Flexural properties of prosthetic provisional polymers. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 12:75–79

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dixon DL, Ekstrand KG, Breeding LC (1991) The transverse strengths of three denture base resins. J Prosthet Dent 66:510–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Morrow R, Rudd K, Rhoads JE (1986) Waxing and processing. Dental laboratory procedures–complete dentures. CV Mosby Co, Washington, pp 276–311

    Google Scholar 

  23. Behr M, Hindelang U, Rosentritt M, Lang R, Handel G (2000) Comparison of failure rates of adhesive-fixed partial dentures for in vivo and in vitro studies. Clin Oral Investig 4:25–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Balkenhol M, Ferger P, Mautner MC, Wostmann B (2007) Provisional crown and fixed partial denture materials: mechanical properties and degree of conversion. Dent Mater 23:1574–1583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Balkenhol M, Köhlerb H, Orbacha K, Wostmanna B (2009) Fracture toughness of cross-linked and non-cross-linked temporary crown and fixed partial denture materials. Dent Mater 25:917–928

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nejatidanesh F, Momeni G, Savabi O (2009) Flexural strength of interim resin materials for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthodont 18:507–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Knobloch LA, Kerby RE, Pulido T, Johnston WM (2011) Relative fracture toughness of bis-acryl interim resin materials. J Prosthet Dent 106:118–125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Food and Drug Administration (1976) FDA guidelines for chemistry and technology requirements of indirect additive petitions. FDA, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kao EC (1989) Influence of food-simulating solvents on resin composites and glass-ionomer restorative cement. Dent Mater 5:201–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jo LJ, Shenoy KK, Shetty S (2011) Flexural strength and hardness of resins for fixed partial dentures. Indian J Dent Res 22:71–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Soderholm K-J (1981) Degradation of glass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res 60:1867–1875

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ogle RE, Sorensen SE, Lewis EA (1986) A new visible light-cured resin system applied to removable prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 56:497–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Braden M (1984) Water absorption characteristics of dental microfine composite filling materials. II. Experimental materials. Biomaterials 5:373–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. McKinney JE, Wu W (1985) Chemical softening and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res 64:1326–1331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Roulet JF, Walti C (1984) Influence of oral fluid on composite resin and glass-ionomer cement. J Prosthet Dent 52:182–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rawls HR (2005) Dental polymers. In: Anusavice KJ (ed) Phillips’ science of dental materials, 11th edn. Saunders, St Louis, pp 143–169

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bipin Y. Muley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Muley, B.Y., Shaikh, S.R., Tagore, M.M. et al. Effect of Dietary Simulating Solvents on the Mechanical Properties of Provisional Restorative Materials-An In Vitro Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 14 (Suppl 1), 98–105 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-014-0373-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-014-0373-z

Keywords

Navigation