Evaluation of flexural strength and surface properties of prepolymerized CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers used for digital 3D complete dentures

Abstract

Purpose: The objectives of this in vitro study were to evaluate the flexural strength (FS), surface roughness (R-a), and hydrophobicity of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)-based computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) polymers and to compare the properties of different CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers with conventional heat-polymerized PMMA following thermal cycling. Materials and methods: Twenty rectangular-shaped specimens (64 x 10 x 3.3 mm) were fabricated from three CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers (M-PM Disc [M], AvaDent Puck Disc [A], and Pink CAD/CAM Disc Polident [P], and one conventional heat-polymerized PMMA (Promolux [C]), according to ISO 20795-1: 2013 standards. The specimens were divided into two subgroups (n = 10), a control and a thermocycled group. The specimens in the thermocycled group were subjected to 5000 thermal cycling procedures (5 to 55 degrees C; 30 s dwell times). The R-a value was measured using a profilometer. Contact angle (CA) was assessed using the sessile drop method to evaluate surface hydrophobicity. In addition, the FS of the specimens was tested in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Surface texture of the materials was assessed using scanning electron microscope (SEM). The data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by Tukey's HSD post-hoc test (alpha < 0.05). Results: CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers showed significantly higher FS than conventional heat-polymerized PMMA for each group (P < 0.001). CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymer [P] showed the highest FS, whereas conventional PMMA [C] showed the lowest FS before and after thermal cycling (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences among the R-a values of the tested denture base polymers in the control group (P > 0.05). In the thermocycled group, the lowest R-a value was observed for CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymer [M] (P < 0.001), whereas CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers [A] and [P], and conventional PMMA [C] had similar R-a values (P > 0.05). Conventional PMMA [C] had a significantly lower CA and consequently lower hydrophobicity compared to the CAD/CAM polymers in the control group (P < 0.001). In the thermocycled group, CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymer [A] and conventional PMMA [C] had significantly higher CA, and consequently higher hydrophobicity when compared to CAD/CAM polymers [M] and [P] (P < 0.001). However, no significant differences were found among the other materials (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The FS and hydrophobicity of the CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers were higher than the conventional heat-polymerized PMMA, whereas the CAD/CAM PMMA-based polymers had similar R-a values to the conventional PMMA. Thermocycling had a significant effect on FS and hydrophobicity except for the R-a of denture base materials.