Arana BJF, Cisneros ÁM

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 73-81
PDF size: 440.91 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of carbonated beverage on the surface microhardness of two acrylic materials used to fabricate temporary restorations. The study was experimental in vitro. Forty blocks of acrylic resins used in provisional restorations were made, 20 from Alike^® (GC AMERICA INC., Lot 1712161) and 20 from Acryptemp^® (Zhermack S.P.A., Lot 302334). After that, the blocks were immersed in distilled water for 24 hours. After this time, the initial surface microhardness was measured. Then the 20 samples of the experimental group were immersed in a carbonated drink (coca cola - soda) for 12 minutes per day, for 5 days. Finally, the final surface microhardness was measured using the Vickers microdurometer. Measures of central tendency and dispersion were used, and the Student's t test and ANOVA were performed. A mean surface microhardness of 8.8 and 7.2HV was found for the PMMA resin group (Initial and final respectively), and 9.5 and 8HV for the bisacrylate group. Statistically significant differences were found when comparing the beginning and end of each group and when comparing the two materials. The acrylic resin of polymethylmethacrylate (Alike^® GC AMERICA INC.) Presented higher surface microhardness compared to the bis acrylic resin (Acrytemp^® Zhermack S.P.A), after being exposed to a carbonated drink.

REFERENCES

1. Lee S., Lai Y., Hsu T. Influence of polymerization conditions on monomer elution and microhardness of autopolymerized polymethyl methacrylate resin. Eur J Oral Sci. abril de 2002; 110 (2): 179-83.

2. Mickeviciute E., Ivanauskiene E., Noreikiene V. In vitro color and roughness stability of different temporary restorative materials. Stomatologija. 2016; 18 (2): 66-72.

3. Hernandez E.P., Oshida Y., Platt J.A., Andres C.J., Barco M.T., Brown D.T. Mechanical properties of four methylmethacrylate-based resins for provisional fixed restorations. Biomed Mater Eng. 2004; 14 (1): 107-22.

4. Digholkar S., Madhav V.N.V., Palaskar J. Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016; 16 (4): 328.

5. Nayyer M., Zahid S., Hassan S., Mian S., Mehmood S., Khan H., et al. Comparative abrasive wear resistance and surface analysis of dental resin-based materials. Eur J Dent. 2018; 12 (1): 57.

6. Mei M., So S., Li H., Chu C. Effect of Heat Treatment on the Physical Properties of Provisional Crowns during Polymerization: An in Vitro Study. J Mater Basel. 2015; 8 (4): 1766-77.

7. Singh A. Comparative Evaluation of Flexural Strength of Provisional Crown and Bridge Materials-An Invitro Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016; 10 (8): 2-7.

8. Kerby R.E., Knobloch L.A., Sharples S., Peregrina A. Mechanical properties of urethane and bis-acryl interim resin materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110(1): 2-8.

9. Baroudi K, Kaminedi R, Penumatsa N, Priya T. The influence of finishing/polishing time and cooling system on surface roughness and microhardness of two different types of composite resin restorations. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2014; 4 (5): 99.

10. Yap A.U., Mah M.K., Lye C.P., Loh P.L. Influence of dietary simulating solvents on the hardness of provisional restorative materials. Dental Materials. 2004; 20 (4): 370-6.

11. Vaidyanathan T.K., Vaidyanathan J., Arghavani D. Elastic, viscoelastic and viscoplastic contributions to compliance during deformation under stress in prosthodontic temporization materials. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2016; 2 (1): 108-17.

12. Porto M., Aguiar F., Brandt W., Liporoni P. Mechanical and physical properties of silorane and methacrylate-based composites. J Dent. 2013; 41 (8): 732-9.

13. Ayaz E.A., Durkan R., Koroglu A., Bagis B. Comparative effect of different polymerization techniques on residual monomer and hardness properties of PMMA-based denture resins. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2014; 12 (3): 228-33.

14. Díez-Quijano C., Azevedo L., Antonaya- Martín J.L., Del Río-Highsmith J., Gómez- Polo M. Evaluation of the clinical behavior of 2 different materials for implant-supported interim fixed partial prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 3913 (19): 1-4.

15. Gandhi N. Evaluation of Surface Microhardness Following Chemical and Microwave Disinfection of Commercially Available Acrylic Resin Denture Teeth. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017; 11 (5): 87-91.

16. Kaur S., Makkar S., Kumar R., Pasricha S., Gupta P. Comparative evaluation of surface properties of enamel and different esthetic restorative materials under erosive and abrasive challenges: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent. 2015; 6 (4): 172.

17. Lutovac M., Popova O.V., Macanovic G., Kristina R., Lutovac B., Ketin S. Testing the Effect of Aggressive Beverage on the Damage of Enamel Structure. J Med Sci. 2017; 5 (7): 987-993.

18. Astudillo-Rubio D. Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal PLoS One. 2018; 13 (4).

19. Bansal K., Saraswathi V., Acharya S. Effect of alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages on color stability and surface roughness of resin composites: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2012; 15 (3): 283.

20. Bhatia C., Chandak M., Rahul A., Sedani S., Chandak R., Adwani N. Comparative evaluation of effect of different beverages on surface hardness of nanohybrid resin composite: An in vitro study. J Interdiscip Dent. 2016; 6 (2): 60.

21. Poggio C., Viola M., Mirando M., Chiesa M., Beltrami R., Colombo M. Microhardness of different esthetic restorative materials: Evaluation and comparison after exposure to acidic drink. Dent Res J. 2018; 15 (3): 166.

22. Aliping-McKenzie M., Linden R., Nicholson J.W. The effect of Coca-Cola and fruit juices on the surface hardness of glass-ionomers and «compomers». J Oral Rehabil. 2004; 31 (11): 1046-52.

23. Hahnel S., Krifka S., Behr M., Kolbeck C., Lang R., Rosentritt M. Performance of resin materials for temporary fixed denture prostheses. Journal of Oral Science. 2019; 61 (2): 270-275.

24. Muley B.Y., Shaikh S.R., Tagore M.M., Khalikar A.N. Effect of Dietary Simulating Solvents on the Mechanical Properties of Provisional Restorative Materials-An In Vitro Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014; 14 (1): 98-105.

25. Guler A.U., Yilmaz F., Kulunk T., Guler E., Kurt S. Effects of different drinks on stainability of resin composite provisional restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94 (2): 118-24.

26. Dayan C., Kiseri B., Gencel B., Kurt H., Tuncer N. Wear resistance and microhardness of various interim fixed prosthesis materials. J Oral Sci. 2019; 61 (3): 447-453.

27. Akova T., Ozkomur A., Uysal H. Effect of food-simulating liquids on the mechanical properties of provisional restorative materials. Dent Mater. 2006; 22 (12): 1130-1134.