• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.37 no.1
• /
• pp.16-22
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of surface polishing and fabrication method on the flexural strength of temporary restorative resin. Materials and Methods: Each of four fabrication methods was used to make 30 temporary restorative resin specimens and the specimens were divided into two groups depending on whether they were polished by mechanical polishing. Specimens were stored in 37℃ thermostat for 24 hours. Flexural strength was measured using a universal testing machine (UTM). The data obtained through the experiment were analyzed with Two-way ANOVA, Tukey's HSD test and Paired t-test. Results: CAD/CAM milling group showed the highest flexural strength regardless of surface polishing. In decreasing order, the flexural strength of the other fabrication method group was as follows SLA 3D printing, DLP 3D printing, and Conventional method group. Conclusion: Surface polishing did not affect flexural strength of the temporary restorative resin (P > 0.05). However, there were statistically significant differences in flexural strength depending on fabrication method (P < 0.05).

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.62-68
• /
• 1999

One of the many dilemmas that the clinical restorative dentist must face is treating young adolescent patient who prematurely loses his permanent teeth. Temporary prosthetic replacement can be achieved with removable denture, orthodontic band-wire fixed denture, adhesion bridge, composite resin splint with reinforcing material until the patients go through growth and development. But, all of these have limitations. Advances in restorative materials and reinforcement materials have made possible new techniques which are as much esthetic, conservative and more economic and stronger than adhesion brides. Two cases are being presented where gas-plasma treated, woven polyethylene fabric to reinforce composite resin was used to fabricate a temporary prosthetic restoration to replace a missing maxillary central incisor. This relatively noninvasive and basically reversible procedure allows the patient to decide the final restoration as he or she goes thorough maturation of the hard and soft tissues.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.115-124
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to measure the polymerization shrinkage and hygroscopic expansion of resin-based temporary filling materials and to evaluate microleakage at the interface between the materials and cavity wall. Five resin-based temporary filing materials were investigated: Fermit (Vivadent), Quicks (Dentkist), Provifil (Promedica), Spacer (Vericom), Clip (Voco). Caviton (GC) was also included for comparison. Polymerization shrinkage of five resin-based temporary filling materials was measured using the bonded disc method. For the measurement of hygroscopic expansion, the discs of six cured temporary filling materials were immersed in saline and a LVDT displacement sensor was used to measure the expansion for 7 days. For estimating of microleakage, Class I cavities were prepared on 120 extracted human molars and randomly assigned to 6 groups of 20 each. The cavities in each group were filled with six temporary filling materials. All specimens were submitted to 1000 thermocycles, with temperature varying from $5^{\circ}C/55^{\circ}C$. Microleakage was determined using a dye penetration test. The results were as follows: 1. Fermit had significantly less polymerization shrinkage than the other resin-based temporary fill ing materials. Fermit (0.22%) < Spacer (0.38%) < Quicks (0.64%), Provifil (0.67%), Clip (0.67%) 2. Resin-based temporary filling materials showed 0.43-1.1% expansion in 7 days. 3. Fermit showed the greatest leakage, while Quicks exhibited the least leakage. 4. There are no correlation between polymerization shrinkage or hygroscopic expansion and microleakage of resin-based temporary filling materials.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.85-89
• /
• 2013

When a patient with a fractured anterior tooth visits the clinic, clinician has to restore the tooth esthetically and quickly. For esthetic resin restoration, clinician can use 'Natural Layering technique' and an index for palatal wall may be needed. In this case report, we introduce pre-restoration index technique on a Class IV defect, in which a temporary filling material is used for easy restoration. Chair-side index fabrication for Class IV restoration is convenient and makes a single-visit treatment possible.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.6
• /
• pp.553-559
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this research was to compare the microtensile bond strength of resin coated surface and resin inlay according temporary filling materials prior to applying self-adhesive resin cement. Caviton(GC, Japan), Provifil(Promedica, Neumunster, Germany), Provifil(Promedica, Neumunster, Germany) & petrolatum, and Eugenol-based cement, Tembond(Kerr, Orange CA, USA) were used as temporary filling materials. After fabrication of Tescera(Bisco, Schamburg IL, USA), it was bonded with a self-adhesive resin cement, Rely X unicem(3M, St. Paul. Minn, USA). After this procedure, the microtensile bond strength was measured and it was analyzed through one-way ANOVA and Duncan test(p<0.05). Caviton(GC, Tokyo, Japan) showed statistical difference except for the control(group I) and the saliva(group II)(p<0.05). Provifil(group IV), Provifil & petroneum(group V), Tembond(group VI) had lower microtensile bond strength.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.77-83
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure and compare the thickness-dependent color dimensions of digital light processing (DLP) three-dimensional (3D) printer and conventional interim restorative resin. Methods: Specimens (N=60) were fabricated using either subtractive manufacturing (S group) or DLP 3D printing (D group) material. All milled and 3D-printed specimens were allocated into three different groups (n=10) according to different thicknesses as follows: 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 mm. Color measurements in the CIELab coordinates were made using a spectrophotometer under room light conditions (1,003 lux). The color differences (𝚫E^*) between the specimen and control target data were calculated. Data were analyzed using the oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA). Post hoc comparisons were conducted using Tukey's honestly significant difference method (α=0.05 for all tests). Results: The 𝚫L^*, 𝚫a^*, 𝚫b^*, and 𝚫E^* values of interim restorative resin produced by DLP 3D printing were obtained in terms of the specimen's thickness increased compared with the increases by subtractive manufacturing. When the thickness was similar, the color difference between subtractive manufacturing and DLP 3D printing was ≥5.5, which is a value required by the dentist for remanufacturing. Conclusion: Color was influenced by the thickness of the interim restorative resin produced by DLP 3D printing.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.144-151
• /
• 2021

PURPOSE. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the wear resistance and surface roughness of three interim resin materials, which were subjected to chewing simulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three interim resin materials were evaluated: (1) three-dimensional (3D) printed (digital light processing type), (2) computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) milled, and (3) conventional polymethyl methacrylate interim resin materials. A total of 48 substrate specimens were prepared. The specimens were divided into two subgroups and subjected to 30,000 or 60,000 cycles of chewing simulation (n = 8). The wear volume loss and surface roughness of the materials were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post-hoc test (α=.05). RESULTS. The mean ± standard deviation values of wear volume loss (in mm³) against the metal abrader after 60,000 cycles were 0.10 ± 0.01 for the 3D printed resin, 0.21 ± 0.02 for the milled resin, and 0.44 ± 0.01 for the conventional resin. Statistically significant differences among volume losses were found in the order of 3D printed, milled, and conventional interim materials (P<.001). After 60,000 cycles of simulated chewing, the mean surface roughness (Ra; ㎛) values for 3D printed, milled, and conventional materials were 0.59 ± 0.06, 1.27 ± 0.49, and 1.64 ± 0.44, respectively. A significant difference was found in the Ra value between 3D printed and conventional materials (P=.01). CONCLUSION. The interim restorative materials for additive and subtractive manufacturing digital technologies exhibited less wear volume loss than the conventional interim resin. The 3D printed interim restorative material showed a smoother surface than the conventional interim material after simulated chewing.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.359-365
• /
• 2013

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of temporary restorative and filling material on bonding strength between lithium disilicate glass-ceramic and dentin. 60 extracted human molars were cross-sectioned at occlusal third and were embedded into self-cure acrylic resin. Then the teeth were randomly divided into four groups of 15 each. Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic is cemented to dentin as follows: after no any application of the provisional materials (Group A), after application of ALIKETM (GC America Inc.)(Group B), after application of Luxatemp$^{(R)}$ Automix plus (DMG, Germany)(Group C), after application of Fermit$^{(R)}$ (Ivoclar Vivadent, Leichtenstein)(Group D). After the specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours, the shear bond strength of the specimens were measured using UTM (Zwick 1456 41, Zwick, Germany) at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min. The data were analysed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. There were no statistically significant differences of bond strength among the groups. Fracture type was showed mixed type of adhesive and cohesive fracture in most of specimens. Within the limitation of this study, bond strength of adhesive resin cement between lithium disilicate glass-ceramic and dentin was not affected by provisional restorative and filling materials.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.419-424
• /
• 2011

Objectives: This study was aimed to determine the effects of temporary sealing materials on microtensile bond strength between resin-coated dentin and resin inlay and to compare the bonding effectiveness of delayed dentin sealing and that of immediate dentin sealing. Materials and Methods: The teeth were divided into 4 groups: group 1, specimens were prepared using delayed dentin sealing after temporary sealing with zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE); group 2, specimens were prepared using immediate dentin sealing and ZOE sealing; group 3, specimens were prepared using immediate dentin sealing and Dycal (Dentsply) sealing; group 4, specimens were prepared using immediately sealed, and then temporarily sealed with a resin-based temporary sealing material. After removing the temporary sealing material, we applied resin adhesive and light-cured. Then the resin inlays were applied and bonded to the cavity with a resin-based cement. The microtensile bond strength of the sectioned specimens were measured with a micro-tensile tester (Bisco Inc.). Significance between the specimen groups were tested by means of one-way ANOVA and multiple Duncan's test. Results: Group 1 showed the lowest bond strength, and group 4 showed the highest bond strength (p < 0.01). When temporary sealing was performed with ZOE, immediate dentin sealing showed a higher bonding strength than delayed dentin sealing (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Based on these results, immediate dentin sealing is more recommended than delayed dentin sealing in bonding a resin inlay to dentin. Also, resin-based temporary sealing materials have shown the best result.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.221-227
• /
• 2000

Provisional fixed partial dentures(FPDs) are an important part of many prosthodontic treatment procedures. These provisional fixed prostheses must fulfill biologic, mechanical, and esthetic requirements to be considered successful. Consideration of all these factors and requirements are important because provisional resin restorations may be worn over a long period to assess the results of periodontal and endodontics therapies, and also during the restorative phase of implant reconstructive procedures. This in vitro study examined flexual strength of four resins commonly used for fixed provisional prostheses. The effects of polymerization conditions were also evaluated. The four resins tested were : Caulk Temporary bridge resin(L.D. Caulk Co. Dentsply International Millford), Jet(Lang Dental Mfg. Co. Chicago. ILL. U.S.A), Alike (Coe Laboratories. Inc. Chicago. ILL. U.S.A) and Tokuso Curefast (Coe Laboratories. Inc. Chicago. ILL. U.S.A) The test specimens were 65mm long, 14mm wide, and 3.5mm thickness. 10 specimens of four resins were cured for 15 minutes at atmospheric pressure and 10 specimens of four resins were cured at an additional pressure of approximately 20 psi. A total of 80 specimens were prepared. The flexual strength was determined by three-point bending test. Data were analysed with the Paired samples T-test and Tukey student-range test Within the limitations imposed in this study, the following conclusions can be drawn : 1. Under the condition of bench curing, Caulk Temporary bridge resin showed the highest flexual strength. In decreasing order, the flexual strength of the other materials was as follows : Jet, Tokuso Curefast, Alike, and Caulk Temporary bridge resin demonstrated significantly higher strength than other resins. 2. Under the condition of pressure curing, Jet showed the highest flexual strength. In decreasing order, the flexual strength of the other materials was as follows : Caulk Temporary bridge resin, Tokuso Curefast, and Alike. There were all statistically significant differences among four resins 3. There was a statistically significant difference between bench- and pressure-cured specimens in all four materials.