In Vitro Comparison of the Cytotoxicity and Water Sorption of Two Different Denture Base Systems

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hakan Akin ◽  
Faik Tugut ◽  
Zubeyde Akin Polat
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-214
Author(s):  
Faik Tugut ◽  
Mehmet Emre Coskun ◽  
Hakan Akin ◽  
Derya Ozdemir Dogan

Aim: Polymethyl methacrylate is the common material used as a denture base. Ease of application, stability in the oral environment are its advantages; however, its mechanical properties should be enhanced. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different ratios of polypropylene fiber (PPF) in addition to denture base materials on impact strength, water sorption, and cytotoxicity. Materials and Methods: Heat-cure acrylic resin specimens were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instruction by adding PPFs of 6 mm length in different ratios (1, 3, 5, 10, and 20 wt%). In order to determine the impact strength, specimens were subjected to a Charpy impact test machine after being kept in distilled water at 37°C for 48 h. A span of 40 mm was adjusted and a 0.5 J pendulum was used. The fractured surface of specimens was also analyzed using a scanning electron microscope. In addition, mouse fibroblast cells and agar diffusion tests were used for cytotoxicity determination. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis and the Mann–Whitney U tests for determining impact strength, and Kruskal–Wallis and Tukey’s range tests were performed for determining water sorption values ( P = 0.05). Results: 5 wt% PPF group exhibited the highest water sorption and impact strength values, and the difference was statistically significant ( P < .05). On the other hand, no cytotoxic effects were determined in PPF added groups. Furthermore, increased fiber concentration caused less water sorption. Conclusion: Addition of PPFs in acrylic resin increased the impact strength and decreased water sorption without any cytotoxic effects.


2008 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 640-642 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rukiye DURKAN ◽  
Mehmet Birol ÖZEL ◽  
Bora BAGIS ◽  
Ali USANMAZ

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 771-774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashanth Shetty ◽  
Lokesh Chhapdia ◽  
Pranav Verma ◽  
Anshul Sahu ◽  
Narendra S Kushwaha ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Aim Different biomaterials and techniques have been introduced in the field of prosthetic dentistry with the purpose of replacement and rehabilitation of the edentulous areas. Due to their shorter setting time, the light-activated restorative and prosthetic materials have the capability of releasing few amount of cytotoxic materials in the oral cavity. Polymer materials [urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) and bis-acryl] are assumed to have high mechanical properties. Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) offers numerous advantages of being highly esthetic in nature and at the same time being cost-effective. Hence, this study aimed to assess and compare the water sorption and cytotoxicity of light-activated UDMA denture base resin and conventional heatactivated PMMA resin. Materials and methods This study included assessment and comparison of water sorption and cytotoxicity of heat-activated PMMA resin and light-activated UDMA denture base system. Fabrication of heat-activated PMMA resin and UDMA specimens was done by investing the wax patterns in stone molds using manufacturer's instructions. Contraction of the specimens was done for assessment of cytotoxicity and water resorption of the UDMA and PMMA resin samples. All the results were analyzed by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software version 18.0. Chi-square test and one-way analysis of variance tests were used for the assessment of the level of significance; p < 0.05 was taken as significant. Results Mean lysis score observed in the PMMA and UDMA groups was 0.4 and 0.3 respectively. While observing at the 3 months time, the mean water resorption in the PMMA and UDMA groups was found to be 37.9 and 40.2 Significant difference in relation to water resorption was observed between the two study groups only at 3 months time. Conclusion Both materials used in this study are nontoxic. Furthermore, UDMA resin materials exhibited lower water resorption after more than 1 month of time of storage. Clinical significance Water resorption is similar for different denture base resin systems till 1 months time. How to cite this article Shetty P, Chhapdia L, Verma P, Sahu A, Kushwaha NS, Chaturvedi R, Manna S. Comparative Analysis of the Water Sorption and Cytotoxicity of Two different Denture Base Systems: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(9):771-774.


2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 967-971 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulf J. Schlegel ◽  
Klaus Püschel ◽  
Michael M. Morlock ◽  
Katrin Nagel

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Unkovskiy ◽  
Franziska Schmidt ◽  
Florian Beuer ◽  
Ping Li ◽  
Sebastian Spintzyk ◽  
...  

The topical literature lacks any comparison between stereolithography (SLA) and direct light processing (DLP) printing methods with regard to the accuracy of complete denture base fabrication, thereby utilizing materials certified for this purpose. In order to investigate this aspect, 15 denture bases were printed with SLA and DLP methods using three build angles: 0°, 45° and 90°. The dentures were digitalized using a laboratory scanner (D2000, 3Shape) and analyzed in analyzing software (Geomagic Control X, 3D systems). Differences between 3D datasets were measured using the root mean square (RMS) value for trueness and precision and mean and maximum deviations were obtained for each denture base. The data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparison test. A heat map was generated to display the locations of the deviations within the intaglio surface. The overall tendency indicated that SLA denture bases had significantly higher trueness for most build angles compared to DLP (p < 0.001). The 90° build angle may provide the best trueness for both SLA and DLP. With regard to precision, statistically significant differences were found in the build angles only. Higher precision was revealed in the DLP angle of 0° in comparison to the 45° and 90° angles.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document