Advertisement

Comparative effect of different polymerization techniques on residual monomer and hardness properties of PMMA-based denture resins

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the residual monomer and microhardness of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA)–based denture resins processed by using autoclave and conventional water bath techniques.

Methods

To determine the amount of residual methyl methacrylate (MMA) monomer, disk-shaped specimens (n=5) were prepared from 3 different acrylic resins (Meliodent, Paladent and Qc-20). Control groups were polymerized in water bath for 30 minutes at 100°C. The study groups were prepared in an autoclave device for 60°C/30 min followed 130°C/10 min and the other group for 60°C/30 min followed by 130°C/20 min. According to standard calibration curves, ultraviolet spectrophotometry at 230 nm was used to determine the residual monomer. For the Vickers hardness measurements, disk-shaped specimens (n=5) were prepared for each test group. Hardness measurements were performed with a Vickers hardness tester under a 4.91-N press load for a 30 seconds, after immersion in distilled water at 37ºC for 48 hours. The data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (p<0.05).

Results

Autoclave polymerization produced a significant decrease in the amount of residual monomers for all resin groups (p<0.05). This procedure also showed a significant increase in hardness for all resin groups (p<0.05). For the 3 resin groups, no significant differences were found between autoclave polymerization for 10 minutes and for 20 minutes (p>0.05).

Conclusions

The autoclave polymerization technique exhibited significantly lower residual monomer content and greater hardness than conventional heat polymerization.

J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014; 12(3): 228 - 233

Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

DOI:10.5301/jabfm.5000199

Authors

Elif Aydogan Ayaz, Rukiye Durkan, Ays¸egul Koroglu, Bora Bagis

Article History

Disclosures

Financial support: The authors have not received any financial support from the companies whose materials are included in this article.
Conflict of interest: The authors state that they have no conflicts of interest in this study.

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

Affiliations

  • Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon - Turkey
  • Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyon - Turkey
  • Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Karaelmas University, Zonguldak - Turkey
  • Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, I˙zmir Katip Çelebi University, I˙zmir - Turkey

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.