Comparative study of interim materials for direct fixed dental prostheses and their fabrication with CAD/CAM technique

Peñate, Lissethe; Basilio, Juan Ignacio Monroy; Roig, Miguel; Mercadé, Montse

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.12.023

Cited by 53 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nowadays, provisional restoration materials are available in blocks for machining by CAD/CAM systems. These blocks are fabricated under optimum polymerization conditions with no interference from water, giving adequate time for post-polymerization processes and relaxation phenomena, which means that the provisional restorations fabricated from blocks, whether monomethacrylate or dimethacrylate, have superior mechanical properties to those fabricated by conventional direct techniques from the moment the restoration is put in place [ 20 , 24 , 25 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Provisional restorations represent an important phase during the rehabilitation process, knowledge of the mechanical properties of the available materials allows us to predict their clinical performance. At present, there is no systematic review, which supports the clinicians’ criteria, in the selection of a specific material over another for a particular clinical situation. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess and compare the mechanical properties of dimethacrylates and monomethacrylates used in fabricating direct provisional restorations, in terms of flexural strength, fracture toughness and hardness. This review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, the New York Academy of Medicine Grey Literature Report and were complemented by hand-searching, with no limitation of time or language up to January 10, 2017. Studies that assess and compare the mechanical properties of dimethacrylate- and monomethacrylate-based provisional restoration materials were selected. A quality assessment of full-text articles were performed according to modified ARRIVE and CONSORT criteria and modified Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for in vitro studies. Initially, 256 articles were identified. After removing the duplicates and applying the selection criteria, 24 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis and 7 were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). It may be concluded that dimethacrylate-based provisional restorations presented better mechanical behavior than monomethacrylate-based ones in terms of flexural strength and hardness. Fracture toughness showed no significant differences. Within the monomethacrylate group, polymethylmethacrylate showed greater flexural strength than polyethylmethacrylate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A statistically significant difference was found between all groups (p<0.001). However, another study reported a non-significant result between provisional fabricated CAD/CAM fixed dental prosthesis with a directly made glass fiber material 19 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study compared the marginal gap, internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture of CAD/CAM provisional crowns with that of direct provisional crowns.Material and Methods An upper right first premolar phantom tooth was prepared for full ceramic crown following tooth preparation guidelines. The materials tested were: VITA CAD-Temp®, Polyetheretherketone “PEEK”, Telio CAD-Temp, and Protemp™4 (control group). The crowns were divided into four groups (n=10), Group1: VITA CAD-Temp®, Group 2: PEEK, Group 3: Telio CAD-Temp, and Group 4: Protemp™4. Each crown was investigated for marginal and internal fit, fracture strength, and mode of fracture. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software version 6.0.Results The average marginal gap was: VITA CAD-Temp® 60.61 (±9.99) µm, PEEK 46.75 (±8.26) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 56.10 (±5.65) µm, and Protemp™4 193.07(±35.96) µm (P<0.001). The average internal fit was: VITA CAD-Temp® 124.94 (±22.96) µm, PEEK 113.14 (±23.55) µm, Telio CAD-Temp 110.95 (±11.64) µm, and Protemp™4 143.48(±26.74) µm. The average fracture strength was: VITA CAD-Temp® 361.01 (±21.61) N, PEEK 802.23 (±111.29) N, Telio CAD-Temp 719.24 (±95.17) N, and Protemp™4 416.40 (±69.14) N. One-way ANOVA test showed a statistically significant difference for marginal gap, internal gap, and fracture strength between all groups (p<0.001). However, the mode of fracture showed no differences between the groups (p>0.05).Conclusions CAD/CAM fabricated provisional crowns demonstrated superior fit and better strength than direct provisional crowns.

show abstract

“…Bis-acryl reinforced with glass fiber exhibited the least marginal discrepancy in long-term use (4,20). This work tested a reasonably long 40-day period in order to simulate clinical conditions and the likely periods for which bis-acryl provisional restorations may remain in contact with the gum tissue, ranging from a few days to several months,.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Two Bis-Acryl Composite Resins Using Human Gingival Fibroblasts

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bis-acryl resins are used for temporary dental restorations and have shown advantages over other materials. The aim of this work was to evaluate the in vitro cytotoxicity of two bis-acryl composite resins (Protemp 4 and Luxatemp Star), obtained at 1, 7 and 40 days after mixing the resin components, using a standardized assay employing human primary cells closely related to oral tissues. Human gingival fibroblast cell cultures were exposed for 24 h to either bis-acryl composite resins, polystyrene beads (negative control) and latex (positive control) extracts obtained after incubation by the different periods, at 37 °C under 5% CO2. Cell viability was evaluated using a multiparametric procedure involving sequential assessment (using the same cells) of mitochondrial activity (XTT assay), membrane integrity (neutral red test) and total cell density (crystal violet dye exclusion test). The cells exposed to the resin extracts showed cell viability indexes exceeding 75% after 24 h. Even when cells were exposed to extracts prepared with longer conditioning times, the bis-acryl composite resins showed no significant cytotoxic effects (p>0.05), compared to the control group or in relation to the first 24 h of contact with the products. There were no differences among the results obtained for the bis-acryl composite resins evaluated 24 h, 7 days and 40 days after mixing. It may be concluded that the bis-acryl resins Protemp 4 and Luxatemp Star were cytocompatible with human gingival fibroblasts, suggesting that both materials are suitable for use in contact with human tissues.

show abstract

Comparative study of interim materials for direct fixed dental prostheses and their fabrication with CAD/CAM technique

Cited by 53 publications

References 21 publications

Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mechanical properties of provisional dental materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparative in vitro evaluation of CAD/CAM vs conventional provisional crowns

Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Two Bis-Acryl Composite Resins Using Human Gingival Fibroblasts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About