Comparative Study on Wear Resistance and Hardness of Several Artificial Resin Teeth

수종의 인공 레진 치아의 마모저항성과 경도에 관한 비교 연구

  • Choi, Yu-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Lee, Joon-Seok (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Cho, In-Ho (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 최유성 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 이준석 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실) ;
  • 조인호 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보철학 교실)
  • Received : 2008.03.10
  • Accepted : 2008.06.25
  • Published : 2008.06.30

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare and analyze wear resistance of acrylic resin tooth in denture opposing to different types of restoration materials. Also, it aimed to compare and analyze the hardness of three various types of resin artificial teeth when using five different types of denture detergents. In this study three types of artificial teeth were used. As ordinary acrylic resin tooth $Trubyte^{(R)}Biotone^{(R)}$ (Dentsply, U.S.A.) was used, and as high hardness resin tooth Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$ (Shofu, Japan) and Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ (Nissin, Japan) were used. To compare wear resistance, gold alloy, dental porcelain, and composite resin were used as opposing restorations. In addition, with three types of resin tooth stated above, five types of denture detergents, which are $Yuhanrox^{(R)}$ (Yuhanclorox, Korea), $Polident^{(R)}$ (Yuhan Co., Korea), $Cidex^{(R)}OPA$ (Johnson & Johnson Medical Co., Korea), $Hexamedin^{(R)}$ (Bukwang Pharm Co., Korea) and Daihan sterile $water^{(R)}$ (Daihan Pharm Co., Korea) were used to compare and analyze the effects denture detergents have on the surface hardness. The results of this study were as follow : 1. When composite resin and dental porcelain were used as the opposing restorations, $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$, Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$, Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ in ascending order showed decrease of cusp height with significant difference (p<0.05). 2. When gold alloy was used as opposing restoration, there was decrease in the cusp height in order of $Trubyte^{(R)}Biotone^{(R)}$, Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$, Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ and $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$ especially showed significant decrease in high cusp height as compared to two other types of artificial tooth (p<0.05). 3. When composite resin, gold alloy and dental porcelain were used as opposing restorations, $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$, Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$, Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ in order decreased greatly in weight and these three materials showed significant difference (p<0.05). 4. Comparing the experiment values, decrease in strength had significant difference in all resin artificial teeth before and after the denture detergents were used (p<0.05). 5. When resin artificial teeth were subsided in $Yuhanrox^{(R)}$, $Cidex^{(R)}OPA$, and $Hexamedin^{(R)}$, $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$, Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$, Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ in order showed decrease in hardness, and $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$ especially showed significant high decrease hardness as to other two types of artificial teeth (p<0.05). Therefore, Physio $Duracross^{(R)}$ seems to have superior wear resistance, and together with Endura $Posterio^{(R)}$, it presents excellent hardness as compared to $Trubyte^{(R)}$ $Biotone^{(R)}$. However, since this study is fragmentary, it should be given careful consideration and more study need to be done before making a definitive conclusion.

References

  1. Coffey JP, Goodkind RJ, Delong R, Douglas WH. In vitro study of the wear characteristics of natural and artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:273-280 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90304-X
  2. Olge RE, David LJ, Ortman HR. Clinical wear study of a new tooth material. Part II. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:67-75 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(85)80073-1
  3. Whitman DJ, Mckinney JE, Hinman RW, Hesby RA, Pelleu GB. In vitro wear rates of three types of commercial denture tooth materials. J Prosthet Dent 1987;57:243-246 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(87)90154-5
  4. Schuyler CH. Full denture service as influenced by tooth forms and materials. J Prosthet Dent 1951;1:33-37 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(51)90077-7
  5. Lee CY, Chung MK. Comparison of wear resistance among resin denture teeth opposing various restorative materials. J Kor Academy of Prosthodontics 1999;37:313-327
  6. Khan Z, Morris JC, Von Fraunhofer JA. Wear of anatomic acrylic resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1985;53:550-551 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90645-6
  7. Khan Z, Morris JC, Von Fraunhofer JA. Wear of nonanatomic(monoplane) acrylic resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1984;52:172-174 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(84)90090-8
  8. Von Fraunhofer JA, Razavi R, Khan Z. Wear characteristics of high strength denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1998;59:173-175
  9. Asad T, Watkinson AC, Huggett R. The effect of disinfection procedures on flexural properties of denture base acrylic resins. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:191-195 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90303-R
  10. Ma T, Johnson GH, Gordon GE. Effects of chemical disinfectants on the surface characteristics and color of denture resins. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77:197-204 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70235-X
  11. Watkinson AC, Huggett R. The effects of various disinfectant solutions on the surface hardness of an acrylic resin denture base material. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:9-12
  12. Winkler S, Monasky GE, Kwok J. Laboratory wear investigation of resin posterior denture teeth J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:812-814 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90590-7
  13. Lidquist JJ, Olge RE, Davis EL. Twelve month results of a clinical wear study of three artificial tooth materials. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:156-161 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80179-9
  14. Mcdowell GC, Bloem TJ, Lang BR. In vivo wear. Part I : The Michigan computer-graphic measuring system. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:112-120 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90360-5
  15. Ogle RE, Ortman LF. Measuring wear of artificial teeth with stereophotography: Part I. J Prosthoet Dent 1985;53:807-812 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90162-3
  16. McKinney JE, Wu W. Relationship between subsurface damage and wear of dental restorative composites. J Dent Res 1982;61:1083-1088 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345820610091101
  17. Yang HJ, Jang BS. The effects of denture cleaners and disinfectants on the color, surface hardness, surface roughness of denture base resins. J Kor Academy of Prosthodontics 2001;39:105-112
  18. Council on Dental Therapeutics. Council on Prosthetic Services and Dental LaboratoryRelations Guidelines for infection control in dental office and the commercial dental laboratory. J Am Dent Assoc 1985;110:969-972 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1985.0016
  19. Jorgensen EB. Materials and methods for cleaning dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1979;42:619-623 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(79)90190-2
  20. Rudd RW, Senia S, Mccleskey FK, Adams FD. Sterilization of complete denture with sodium hypochlorite. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:318-325 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(84)90212-9
  21. Shen C, Javid NS, Colaizzi FA. The effect of glutaraldehyde base disinfectants on denture base resins. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:583-589 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90281-3