Reji Kumar¹, Jayakrishnakumar S², Hariharan Ramakrishnan³*, Vallabh Mahadevan³ and Azhagarasan NS⁴

¹Prosthodontist, Chennai, India
²Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Ragas Dental College, Chennai, India
³Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Ragas Dental College, Chennai, India
⁴Professor and HOD, Ragas Dental College, Chennai, India

*Corresponding Author: Hariharan Ramakrishnan, Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Ragas Dental College, Chennai, India.

Received: January 27, 2022; Published: March 22, 2022

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate and compare the flexural strength of CAD/CAM milled PMMA resin and Rapid prototype3D printed resin for long term provisional restorations.

Materials and Methods: Twenty rectangular shaped samples of dimensions 25mm(l) x 2mm (b) x 2mm (h) were prepared for evaluating the flexural strength according to ISO 10477:2018 (Dentistry-polymer-based crown and veneering materials). CAD/CAM milled PMMA resin samples (Group-I; n=10), Rapid prototype 3D printed resin samples (Group-II; n=10), were fabricated and grouped based on the type of material. All the twenty samples were subjected to 3-point bend test using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min until fracture. The flexural strength values were tabulated and statistically analysed using student t- test.

Results: The mean flexural strength for Group I (CAD CAM PMMA) test samples was 86.25 MPa, for Group II (Rapid prototype 3D printed resin) the mean flexural strength was 45.00 MPa. The comparative evaluation of the mean flexural strength of Group I test samples yielded higher flexural strength than Group II test samples and it was found to be statistically highly significant (p < 0.001**).

Conclusions: CAD/CAM milled PMMA resin exhibited the maximum flexural strength than Rapid prototyping3D printed resin. Therefore, CAD/CAM PMMA– based polymers can be used for long-term provisional restorations compared to Rapid prototype 3D printed resin.

Keywords:Polymethylmethacrylate; Flexural Strength; Temporary Dental Restorations; Three Dimensional

References

1. Nejatidanesh F., et al. “Flexural Strength of Interim Resin Materials             for Fixed
2. Prosthodontics”. Journal of Prosthodontics 18 (2009): 507-511.
3. Haselton DR., et al. “Flexural strength of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2 (2002): 225-228.
4. Ireland MF., et al. “In vitro mechanical property comparison of four resins used for fabrication of provisional fixed restorations”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2 (1998): 158-162.
5. Anusavice KJ. “Physical properties of dental materials”. Phillips’s science of dental materials (10^th edition) (1996): 33-74.
6. Karaokutan I., et al. “In vitro study of fracture strength of provisional crown materials”. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics 1 (2015): 27-31.
7. Digholkar S., et al. “Evaluation of the flexural strength and microhardness of provisional crown and bridge materials fabricated by different methods”. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 4 (2016): 328-334.
8. Yao J., et al. “Comparison of the flexural strength and marginal accuracy of traditional and CAD/CAM interim materials before and after thermal cycling”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 3 (2014): 649-657.
9. Chitchumnong P., et al. “Comparison of three- and four- point flexural strength testing of denture-base polymers”. Dental Materials1 (1985): 2-5.
10. Koumjian JH and Nimmo A. “Evaluation of fracture resistance of resins used for provisional restorations”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 6 (1990): 654-657.
11. Gratton DG and Aquilino SA. “Interim restorations”. Dental Clinics of North America 2 (2004): 487-497.
12. Lang R., et al. “Fracture resistance of PMMA and resin matrix composite-based interim FPD materials”. The International Journal of Prosthodontics 4 (2003): 381-384.
13. Alp G., et al. “Comparison of Flexural Strength of Different CAD/CAM PMMA‐Based Polymers”. Journal of Prosthodontics2 (2019): 491-495.
14. Alt V., et al. “Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures: CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations”. Dental Materials 4 (2011): 339-347.
15. Rekow ED. “Dental CAD/CAM systems: A 20‑ year success story”. Journal of the American Dental Association 137 (2006): 5S-6S.
16. Güth JF., et al. “Enhancing the predictability of complex rehabilitation with a removable CAD/CAM fabricated long term provisional prosthesis: A clinical report”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 107 (2012): 1‑6.

Citation

Citation: Rejikumar, Jayakrishnakumar S, Ramakrishnan H, Mahadevan V, Azhagarasan NS. “Evaluation of the Flexural Strength of Cad/Cam Milled Polymethylmethacryateand Rapid Prototype 3d Printed Resin for Long Term Provisional Restorations".Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 6.4 (2022): 88-94.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Hariharan Ramakrishnan., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.