Fahmy Nadia Z, Sharawi Amr
Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, 6 October University, Cairo, Giza Governorate 11511, Egypt.
J Prosthodont. 2009 Aug;18(6):512-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00468.x. Epub 2009 Apr 21.
This study assessed the efficiency of reinforcing provisional restorations by adding a fine gauze metallic mesh or polyethylene fibers between the abutments spanning the pontic length.
Forty-five resin fixed partial dentures (FPDs) were constructed using three provisional resins. The three resin groups were further divided into three subgroups depending on their reinforcement. Specimens were loaded compressively, and the load required to fracture the specimens was recorded in Newtons. Data were presented as means and standard deviation values. A regression model with two-way ANOVA was used in testing significance. Duncan's post hoc test was used for pairwise comparison (p < or = 0.05).
Duralay resin and Duralay fiber-reinforced restorations showed the highest fracture-resistance values, followed by Protemp and Snap, which showed statistically similar values. The three mesh-reinforced resin restoration materials showed no statistically significant difference between their fracture resistance values. Reinforcement did not alter the fracture resistance of Duralay and Protemp resin subgroups, but significantly increased that of Snap, equalizing it with the other resins. The three resin materials had similar moduli. Significant alterations occurred after fiber reinforcement. Results showed that fiber-reinforced Duralay resin showed the highest modulus values, while no statistical difference was found between the moduli of fiber-reinforced Protemp and Snap. Regarding the mesh-reinforced groups, Duralay had the highest modulus followed by Protemp and Snap. Reinforcements altered the modulus values of Duralay resin only. Mesh-reinforced Duralay resin showed the highest mean modulus, but no statistically significant difference was apparent between fiber-reinforced and control groups. As for Protemp and Snap resin subgroups, their moduli remained unchanged by reinforcements.
Initially, Duralay resin had higher fracture resistance values than Protemp II and Snap. Fiber and mesh reinforcements increased the fracture resistance of Snap. No statistically significant difference was evident among the fracture resistances of the three mesh-reinforced resin FPD restorations. The three resins had similar moduli. Fiber and mesh reinforcement increased the modulus of Duralay resin but did not change that of Protemp and Snap. Fiber and metal mesh reinforcements may alter the fracture strength and modulus of some, but not all, provisional resins.
本研究评估了通过在跨越桥体长度的基牙之间添加细纱布金属网或聚乙烯纤维来增强临时修复体的效率。
使用三种临时树脂制作了45个树脂固定局部义齿(FPD)。这三个树脂组根据其增强方式进一步分为三个亚组。对标本进行压缩加载,并记录使标本断裂所需的载荷,单位为牛顿。数据以均值和标准差表示。使用双向方差分析的回归模型进行显著性检验。采用邓肯事后检验进行两两比较(p≤0.05)。
Duralay树脂和Duralay纤维增强修复体显示出最高的抗断裂值,其次是Protemp和Snap,它们显示出统计学上相似的值。三种网状增强树脂修复材料的抗断裂值之间没有统计学上的显著差异。增强并没有改变Duralay和Protemp树脂亚组的抗断裂性,但显著提高了Snap的抗断裂性,使其与其他树脂相当。这三种树脂材料具有相似的模量。纤维增强后发生了显著变化。结果表明,纤维增强的Duralay树脂显示出最高的模量值,而纤维增强的Protemp和Snap的模量之间没有统计学差异。对于网状增强组,Duralay的模量最高,其次是Protemp和Snap。增强仅改变了Duralay树脂的模量值。网状增强的Duralay树脂显示出最高的平均模量,但纤维增强组和对照组之间没有明显的统计学差异。至于Protemp和Snap树脂亚组,它们的模量不受增强的影响。
最初,Duralay树脂的抗断裂值高于Protemp II和Snap。纤维和网状增强提高了Snap的抗断裂性。三种网状增强树脂FPD修复体的抗断裂性之间没有明显的统计学差异。这三种树脂具有相似的模量。纤维和网状增强提高了Duralay树脂的模量,但没有改变Protemp和Snap的模量。纤维和金属网增强可能会改变一些但不是所有临时树脂的断裂强度和模量。