대한치과보철학회지 (The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics)

  • 제40권4호
  • /
  • Pages.386-395
  • /
  • 2002
  • /
  • 0301-2875(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-3789(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지

중합방법이 다른 의치상 이장용레진의 물리적 특성

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF RELINING DENTURE BASE RESINS WITH DIFFERENT POLYMERIZING METHODS

  • 조석규 (전북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실 및 구강생체과학연구소) ;
  • 송광엽 (전북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실 및 구강생체과학연구소) ;
  • 윤수연 (전북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실 및 구강생체과학연구소) ;
  • 김문영 (전북대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실 및 구강생체과학연구소)
  • Cho Suck-Kyu (Department of Prosthodontics and Institute of Oral Bio Science, College of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Song Kwang-Yeob (Department of Prosthodontics and Institute of Oral Bio Science, College of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Yoon Soo-Yun (Department of Prosthodontics and Institute of Oral Bio Science, College of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Kim Mun-Young (Department of Prosthodontics and Institute of Oral Bio Science, College of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University)
  • 발행 : 2002.08.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This study would like to measure and compare water sorption and solubility of acrylic resins, with 3 different polymerizing methods, and tensile strength between denture base resin and relining rosins. For this experiment, 3 different acrylic resins were used; heat polymerizing resin: Vertex (Dentmex, Zeist, Holland), autopolymerizing resin: Tokuso Rebase (Tokuyama Corp, Tokyo, Japan), and light curing resin: Mild Rebaron LC(GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan) The results were as follows ; 1. Tokuso Rebase showed the lowest water sorption. followed by Mild Rebaron LC and Vertex. Among resins, there were some signigicant differences (P<0.05). 2. Vertex showed the lowest solubility, followed by Mild Rebaron LC and Tokuso Rcbase. Among resins, there were some signigicant differences (P<0.05). 3. Intact Vertex showed the highest tensile strength, and Mild Rebaron LC had a more tensile strength than Tokuso Rebase. Between Vertex and the other resins, there were some signigicant differences (P<0.05) However, between Mild Rebaron LC and Tokuso Rebase, there was no statistical difference (P>0.05). About 50% of Rebaron LC showed cohesive fracture. 4. Tensile strength has more decreased after thermocycling than before, but there was no statistical difference (P>0.05).

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Cucci ALM, Rachid RN, Giampaolo ET, Vergani ET. Tensile bond strengths of hard chairside reline resins as influenced by water storage. J Oral Rehabil 1999; 26:631-635 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1999.00428.x
  2. Stanford JW, Burns CL, Paffenbarger GC. Self-curing resins for repairing dentures : Some physical properties. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;51:307
  3. Cucci ALM, Vergani CE, Giampaolo ET. Water sorption, solubility, and bond strength of two autopolymerizing acrylic and one heat-polymerizing acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:434-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70008-3
  4. Woelfel JB, Paffenbarger GC, Sweeney WT. Some physical properties of organic denture base materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1963;67:489-504 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1963.0323
  5. Craig RG, O' Brien WJ, Powers JM. Dental materals properties and manipulation. plastic in prosthetics. 5thed. St Louis:CV Mosby: 1992.p267-9
  6. Arena CA, Evans DB, Hilton TJ. A comparison of bond strengths among chairside hard reline materials. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70:126-31 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90006-A
  7. Ogle RE, Sorensen SE, Lewis EA. A new visible light-cured resin system applied to removable prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:497-506 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90397-5
  8. Shifman A. Clinical applications of visible-cured resin in maxillofacial prosthetics : Pt I. Denture base and reline material. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:578-582 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90132-V
  9. Giunta JL, Grauer I, Nielsen E. Skin sensitivity to denture base materials in the burning mouth syndrome. Contact Dermatitis 1979;5:90-6 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1979.tb04805.x
  10. Austin AT, Basker RM. The level of residual monomer in acrylic denture base materials with particular reference to a modified method of analysis. Br Dent J 1980;149:281-6 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4804511
  11. Arima T, Murata H, Hamada T. The effects of cross linking agents on the waer sorption and solubility characteristics of denture base resins. J Oral Rehabil 1996; 23:476-480 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1996.tb00882.x
  12. Bruden M. The absorption of water by acrylic resins and others materials. J Prosthet Dent 1964;14:307-316 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(64)90091-5
  13. Wong MS, Cheng YY, Chow TW, Clark KF. Effect of processing method on the dimensional accuracy and water sorption of acrylic resin denture. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:300-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70273-8
  14. Council on dental materials and devices: Revised Americal Dental Association specification No.12 for denture base polymers. J Am Dent Assoc 1975;90:451-8 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1975.0069
  15. Bandrup J, Immergut E.H. Polymer Handbook. 2nd edn. New York, Wiley Interscience, pp.VII-7, III-147, 148
  16. Fletcher AM, Purnaveja S, Amin WM, Ritchie GM, Moradians S, Dodd AW. The level of residual monomer in self curing denture-base materials. J Dent Res 1983; 62:118-20 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345830620020601
  17. Bates JF, Stafford GD, Huggett R, Handley RW. Current status of pour type denture base resins. J Dent 1977;5:177-89 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(77)90001-X
  18. Tsuchiya H, Hoshino Y, Tajima K, Takagi N. Leaching and cytotoxicity of formaldehyde and methylmethacrylate from acrylic resin denture base materials. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:618-24 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(94)90448-0
  19. Arima T, Nikawa H, Hamada T, Harsini. Composition and effect of denture base resin surface primers for reline acrylic resins. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:457-62 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90044-X