Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Manipal University College Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia.
Department of Prosthodontics and Crown & Bridge, Government General Hospital, Afzalpur, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2024 Mar 19;25(3):241-244. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3612.
The current study was designed to assess the linear dimensional changes and adaptability of two heat-cured denture base resins using various cooling methods.
To prepare a total of 90 acrylic resin samples (45 acrylic resin samples for each material), four rectangular stainless-steel plates measuring 25 × 25 × 10 mm were fabricated. For both groups, the material was put into the mold at the dough stage. Group I - SR Triplex Hot Heat Cure acrylic; group II - DPI Heat Cure acrylic. Both groups used the same curing procedure. One of the following three techniques was used to cool the material (15 samples from each material) once the curing cycle was finished: (A) water bath, (b) quenching, and (C) air. A traveling microscope was used to measure the distance between the markings on the acrylic samples. The data was recorded and statistically analyzed.
In SR Triplex Hot heat cure acrylic material, the maximum linear dimensional changes were found in the quenching technique (0.242 ± 0.05), followed by the air technique (0.168 ± 0.11) and the least was found in the water bath technique (0.146 ± 0.01). In DPI Heat Cure acrylic material, the maximum linear dimensional changes were found in the quenching technique (0.284 ± 0.09), followed by the air technique (0.172 ± 0.18) and the least was found in the water bath technique (0.158 ± 0.10). There was a statistically significant difference found between these three cooling techniques. On comparison of adaptability, the water bath technique, the marginal gap SR Triplex Hot was 0.012 ± 0.02 and DPI Heat Cure was 0.013 ± 0.02. In the quenching technique, the marginal gap SR Triplex Hot was 0.019 ± 0.04 and DPI Heat Cure was 0.016 ± 0.04. In the air technique, the marginal gap SR Triplex Hot was 0.017 ± 0.01 and DPI Heat Cure was 0.019 ± 0.01.
The present study concluded that among the different cooling methods, the water bath technique had the least linear dimensional change, followed by the air and quenching techniques. When comparing the materials, DPI Heat Cure acrylic resin showed a greater linear dimensional change than SR Triplex Hot heat cure acrylic resin.
During polymerization, heat-cured acrylic resins experience dimensional changes. Shrinkage and expansion are dimensional changes that occur in heat-cured acrylic resins and have an impact on the occlusal relationship and denture fit. However, the denture base's material qualities and the different temperature variations it experiences during production may have an impact on this. How to cite this article: Kannaiyan K, Rathod A, Bhushan P, . Assessment of Adaptability and Linear Dimensional Changes of Two Heat Cure Denture Base Resin with Different Cooling Techniques: An Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(3):241-244.
本研究旨在评估两种热固性义齿基托树脂在不同冷却方法下的线性尺寸变化和适应性。
为制备总共 90 个丙烯酸树脂样本（每种材料 45 个样本），制作了四个 25×25×10mm 的矩形不锈钢板。对于两组，将材料放入模具中，处于面团阶段。I 组-SR Triplex Hot 热固性丙烯酸树脂；II 组-DPI 热固性丙烯酸树脂。两组均采用相同的固化程序。一旦固化周期完成，使用以下三种技术之一冷却材料（每种材料 15 个样本）：（A）水浴，（b）淬火，和（C）空气。使用巡回显微镜测量丙烯酸样本上标记之间的距离。记录数据并进行统计分析。
在 SR Triplex Hot 热固性丙烯酸树脂材料中，发现淬火技术的最大线性尺寸变化为 0.242±0.05，其次是空气技术 0.168±0.11，最小的是水浴技术 0.146±0.01。在 DPI Heat Cure 丙烯酸树脂材料中，发现淬火技术的最大线性尺寸变化为 0.284±0.09，其次是空气技术 0.172±0.18，最小的是水浴技术 0.158±0.10。这三种冷却技术之间存在统计学上的显著差异。在适应性比较方面，水浴技术的 SR Triplex Hot 的边缘间隙为 0.012±0.02，DPI Heat Cure 的边缘间隙为 0.013±0.02。在淬火技术中，SR Triplex Hot 的边缘间隙为 0.019±0.04，DPI Heat Cure 的边缘间隙为 0.016±0.04。在空气技术中，SR Triplex Hot 的边缘间隙为 0.017±0.01，DPI Heat Cure 的边缘间隙为 0.019±0.01。
本研究得出结论，在不同的冷却方法中，水浴技术的线性尺寸变化最小，其次是空气和淬火技术。在比较材料时，DPI Heat Cure 丙烯酸树脂的线性尺寸变化大于 SR Triplex Hot 热固性丙烯酸树脂。
在聚合过程中，热固性丙烯酸树脂会发生尺寸变化。收缩和膨胀是热固性丙烯酸树脂发生的尺寸变化，会影响咬合关系和义齿的贴合度。然而，义齿基托的材料质量以及在生产过程中经历的不同温度变化可能会对此产生影响。如何引用本文：Kannaiyan K, Rathod A, Bhushan P,.评估两种热固化义齿基托树脂在不同冷却技术下的适应性和线性尺寸变化：一项 研究。当代牙病实践 2024;25(3):241-244.
