J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci.  2016 Sep;32(3):169-175. 10.14368/jdras.2016.32.3.169.

Comparison of flexural strength and modulus of elasticity in several resinous teeth splinting materials

• Yoo JI
• Kim SY
• Batbayar B
• Kim JW
• Park SH
• Cho KM

• KMID: 2357844
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2016.32.3.169

Abstract

PURPOSE
Direct splinting material should have high flexural strength to withstand force during mastication and low modulus of elasticity to provide some movement while force applied for relief of stress. The purpose of this study was to compare flexural strength and modulus of elasticity of several resinous splinting materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Four materials; Super-Bond C&B, G-FIX, G-aenial Universal Flo, FiltekTM Z350 XT; were used in this study. Fifteen rectangular bar specimens of each material were prepared. Three-point bending test were performed to determine physical properties. Maximum load at fracture was recorded and flexural strength and modulus of elasticity were calculated. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Scheffe's tests at a 0.05 level of significance were conducted on all test results.
RESULTS
Statistical analysis reveals that Super-Bond C&B had significant low mean value for flexible strength and the other three materials showed no significant difference. For modulus of elasticity, Super-Bond C&B exhibited statistically lower modulus of elasticity. G-FIX presented intermediate result, showing statistically higher modulus of elasticity than Super-Bond C&B but lower than G-aenial Universal Flo and FiltekTM Z350 XT. There was no significant difference on modulus of elasticity between G-aenial Universal Flo and FiltekTM Z350 XT.
CONCLUSION
Using a G-FIX, the newly commercially available splinting material, which shows higher fracture resistance properties comparable to flowable and restorative composite resin and a relatively flexible nature might be a beneficial for stabilizing teeth mobility.

Keyword

tooth mobility; splint; flexural strength; modulus of elasticity; 3 point bending test

MeSH Terms

Elastic Modulus*
Mastication
Splints*
Tooth Mobility
Tooth*

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Schematic drawing of the mold used for specimen fabrication.

Reference

References

1. Bernal G, Carvajal JC, Muñoz-Viveros CA. A review of the clinical management of mobile teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2002; 3:10–22. PMID: 12444399.

2. Mazzoleni S, Meschia G, Cortesi R, Bressan E, Tomasi C, Ferro R, Stellini E. In vitro comparison of the flexibility of different splint systems used in dental traumatology. Dent Traumatol. 2010; 26:30–6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2009.00843.x. PMID: 20089059.

3. Wood M, Kern M, Thompson VP, Romberg E. Ten-year clinical and microscopic evaluation of resin- bonded restorations. Quintessence Int. 1996; 27:803–7. PMID: 9452672.

4. Burcak Cengiz S, Stephan Atac A, Cehreli ZC. Biomechanical effects of splint types on traumatized tooth: a photoelastic stress analysis. Dent Traumatol. 2006; 22:133–8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2006.00339.x. PMID: 16643288.

5. Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM, Mejàre I, Cvek M. Healing of 400 intra-alveolar root fractures. 2. Effect of treatment factors such as treatment delay, repositioning, splinting type and period and antibiotics. Dent Traumatol. 2004; 20:203–11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2004.00278.x. PMID: 15245519.

6. Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM, Andersson L. Textbook and color atlas of traumatic injuries to the teeth. 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Munksgaard;2007. p. 842–9.

7. von Arx T. Splinting of traumatized teeth with focus on adhesive techniques. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2005; 33:409–14. PMID: 16033040.

8. Bauss O, Schwestka-Polly R, Schilke R, Kiliaridis S. Effect of different splinting methods and fixation periods on root development of autotransplanted immature third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 63:304–10. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2004.06.056. PMID: 15742278.

9. von Arx T, Filippi A, Lussi A. Comparison of a new dental trauma splint device (TTS) with three commonly used splinting techniques. Dent Traumatol. 2001; 17:266–74. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-9657.2001.170605.x. PMID: 11766094.

10. Filippi A, von Arx T, Lussi A. Comfort and discomfort of dental trauma splints - a comparison of a new device (TTS) with three commonly used splinting techniques. Dent Traumatol. 2002; 18:275–80. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-9657.2002.00121.x. PMID: 12427202.

11. Prévost J, Granjon Y. An in vitro study of the passivity of splints in dental trauma. J Dent. 1998; 26:39–45. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(96)00069-3.

12. Prévost J, Nivoit M, Granjon Y. Management of dental trauma: development of a 2D data acquisition system to evaluate passivity of dental splints. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1997; 35:409–14. DOI: 10.1007/BF02534099. PMID: 9327621.

13. Menendez ME, Thornton E, Kent S, Kalajian T, Ring D. A prospective randomized clinical trial of prescription of full-time versus as-desired splint wear for de Quervain tendinopathy. Int Orthop. 2015; 39:1563–9. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2779-6. PMID: 25916954.

14. Monteiro GQ, Montes MA. Evaluation of linear polymerization shrinkage, flexural strength and modulus of elasticity of dental composites. Mater Res. 2010; 13:51–5. DOI: 10.1590/S1516-14392010000100012.

15. Hofmann N, Papsthart G, Hugo B, Klaiber B. Comparison of photo-activation versus chemical or dual-curing of resin-based luting cements regarding flexural strength, modulus and surface hardness. J Oral Rehabil. 2001; 28:1022–8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00809.x. PMID: 11722718.

16. Anusavice KJ, Phillips RW. Phillips’ science of dental materials. 11th ed. St. Louis: Saunders;2003. p. 410.

17. Kawaguchi M, Fukushima T, Horibe T. Effect of monomer structure on the mechanical properties of light-cured unfilled resins. Dent Mater J. 1988; 7:174–81. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.7.174. PMID: 3272864.

18. Chang M, Dennison J, Yaman P. Physical property evaluation of four composite materials. Oper Dent. 2013; 38:E144–53. DOI: 10.2341/12-203-L. PMID: 23550912.

19. Azillah MA, Anstice HM, Pearson GJ. Long-term flexural strength of three direct aesthetic restorative materials. J Dent. 1998; 26:177–82. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(96)00089-9.

20. Attar N, Tam LE, McComb D. Flow, strength, stiffness and radiopacity of flowable resin composites. J Can Dent Assoc. 2003; 69:516–21. PMID: 12954140.

21. Yap AU. Effectiveness of polymerization in composite restoratives claiming bulk placement: impact of cavity depth and exposure time. Oper Dent. 2000; 25:113–20. PMID: 11203797.

22. Yap AU, Teoh SH. Comparison of flexural properties of composite restoratives using the ISO and mini-flexural tests. J Oral Rehabil. 2003; 30:171–7. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01004.x.