Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 88, Issue 4 , Pages 381-387, October 2002

Effect of polymerization under pressure on indirect tensile mechanical properties of light-polymerized composites☆☆★★

The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

Abstract 

Statement of Problem. Flaws developed during polymerization of restorative materials cause a decrease in mechanical properties. Purpose. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of polymerization under pressure on the indirect tensile mechanical properties (stiffness and diametral tensile strength) of several light-polymerized composites. Material and Methods. Five light-polymerized composites were tested: Brilliant, Z100, TPH Spectrum, Prodigy, and Pertac Hybrid. A total of 80 cylindrical disk specimens (6 mm × 2 mm) were prepared for each material in a special mold that enabled polymerization under pressure (PUP). An equal number of specimens were polymerized under surface pressures of 0, .35, .71 and 1.06 MPa (n = 20). Stiffness (N/mm) and diametral tensile strength (DTS) (MPa) were analyzed while loading the specimen to failure with a loading machine. Two-way analysis of variance and Weibull analyses were applied (α=5%). Results. Material type had a statistically significant influence on both DTS and stiffness (P<.0001). Differences up to 33% in DTS and up to 70% in stiffness values were found among the tested materials. Loading (PUP) had a significant influence on stiffness (P<.03) and DTS (P<.0001). PUP caused an increase in DTS values for Brilliant, Z100, and Prodigy of about 20% (P<.001) and increased stiffness only for Brilliant (15%). However, the amount of pressure needed for the improvement was different between materials (interaction between materials and loadings) (P<.0005). Weibull statistics showed that PUP improved the chances for reducing flaws in a material. Conclusion. Polymerizing material under pressure can improve its DTS and stiffness. However, the pressure needed for the procedure is material dependent. (J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:381-7.)

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Reprint requests to: Tamar Brosh, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, ISRAEL, Fax: 972-3-6409250, E-mail: tbrosh @post.tau.ac.il

☆☆ aLecturer, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry

 bPrivate practice.

★★ cClinical Professor, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry

 dClinical Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry

PII: S0022-3913(02)00229-9

doi:10.1067/mpr.2002.128100

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 88, Issue 4 , Pages 381-387, October 2002