scholarly journals Evaluation of Bond Strength and Dimensional Accuracy of Soft Liner to Microwave Cured Denture Base Material

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-37
Author(s):  
Shilan H. Fatah ◽  
Radhwan H. Hasan
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Water Bath ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Liner Material ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Soft Liner ◽  
Pmma Surface

Today, soft liners are being widely used in dental practices by their application to the inner surfaces of the denture with hopes to evenly distribute any potential uneven forces, and to provide a cushion effect to the oral mucosa of the patient mouth. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of (a) polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) denture base material curing technique, (b) Molloplast B soft liner curing technique, and (c) PMMA surface treatment, on the “shear bond strength” (SBS) between the Molloplast B liner and PMMA. A total of 80 samples were used in this study to evaluate the SBS performance of microwave (Nature-Cryl, Acron Gc, Japan) and conventional water bath (Ivoclar triplex, Liechtenstein) curing techniques of PMMA, and to evaluate the curing technique of soft liner material Molloplast B (DETAX,GERMANY). Surface treatment of PMMA was performed for half of the samples using neodymium:yttrium aluminum-garnet Nd:YAG laser, and the other half of the samples were surface-treated using AL2O3 sandblasting method. The results showed that the highest mean value in conventional water bath-cured soft liner was 26.69 MPa, whereas the lowest mean value for microwave-cured soft liner was 15.22 MPa. No significant difference was observed between the SBS performance regarding the PMMA surface treatment and curing techniques. Conventional water bath curing technique for soft liner treatment improved the SBS performance. Regarding the PMMA curing technique, the conventional water bath achieved higher SBS, yet the difference was not statistically significant. Finally, surface treatment using laser improved the SBS compared to sandblasted method, but the improvement here was also statistically insignificant.

scholarly journals The role of surface treatments on the bond between acrylic denture base and teeth

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauro Egídio Bragaglia ◽  
Luiz Henrique Maykot Prates ◽  
Maria Cristina Marino Calvo
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Compressive Load ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Surface Grinding ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Abrasive Stone

The aim of this study was to compare the bond strength between acrylic denture base and teeth subjected to 6 surface treatments. Ninety-six specimens were made with poly(methylmethacrylate) teeth bonded to a microwave-polymerized acrylic denture base material. The specimens were distributed into 6 groups (n=16) according to surface treatments: CT - no treatment (control); MN - methylmethacrylate monomer etching; AO - 50-µm-particle aluminum oxide air abrasion; BR - glaze removal with a round bur; ST - surface grinding with an aluminum oxide abrasive stone; group CV - cavity preparation (diatorics). The control and surface-treated groups were subjected to a compressive load at 45º angle to the long axis of the teeth. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA, followed by Scheffé's test (p<0.05). Bond strength means and (SD) in kgf for groups were: CT: 18.19 (7.14), MN: 18.34 (5.28), AO: 23.82 (5.40), BR: 23.30 (4.79), ST: 25.39 (7.80) and CV: 17.48 (7.17). There was statistically significant difference (p=0.037997) only between ST and CV. In conclusion, ridge lap surface grinding with an aluminum oxide abrasive stone provided the highest bond strength, though it differed significantly only when compared to diatorics. The other surface treatments provided similar bond between the acrylic denture base and teeth.

A Comparison of Acrylic and Multilithic Teeth Bond Strengths to Acrylic Denture Base Material

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 17-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramin Mosharraf ◽  
Matin Abed-Haghighi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Fracture Site ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Denture Teeth ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Experimental Laboratory ◽  
Bond Strengths ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Aim Debonding of denture teeth from the denture base can be frustrating for both the clinician as well as his or her patients. The wear resistance of composite denture teeth has been well investigated since their introduction, but there have been few studies about the bonding of these teeth to acrylic denture base resins. The aim of this study was to compare the bond strengths of two brands of acrylic and one brand of multilithic denture teeth to acrylic denture base material. Methods and Materials In this experimental-laboratory study, three types of denture teeth—Yaghoot, Super Brilian, and Major—were used. After grinding the glossy ridge lap surfaces, the teeth were mounted on two sides of triangularshaped wax models. Then the wax elimination and resin processing laboratory procedures were carried out as is done with the fabrication of a complete denture. Each of the specimens was tested using a universal testing machine with a cross head speed of 5mm/min at an angle of 130 degrees to the long axis of the teeth. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Chisquare tests. Results The mean bond strength in the Yaghoot group was 717.43±293.59 N while in the Super Brilian group it was 578.40±395.38 and in the Major group, 547.95±296.75N. However, there was no significant difference between the three groups (p=0.194). Conclusion Although the mean bond strength in the multilithic group was higher than in the other groups, no significant difference was found between the three groups. There was no significant difference between the three groups with regard to the prevalence and type of fracture site. Clinical Significance The bonding strength of multilithic denture teeth to denture base resins was found to be comparable to, and even slightly higher than, acrylic conventional denture teeth, making them a promising choice for clinicians in the fabrication of removable dentures. Citation Mosharraf R, Abed-Haghighi M. A Comparison of Acrylic and Multilithic Teeth Bond Strengths to Acrylic Denture Base Material. J Contemp Dent Pract [Internet]. 2009 Sept; 10(5). Available from: http://www.thejcdp.com/journal/ view/a-comparison-of-acrylic-andmultilithic-teethbond- strengths-to-acrylic-den.

Influence of Silver-Zinc Zeolite Incorporation on Shear Bond Strength of Silicon Cold Cure Soft Liner

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Huda Alaa Aldeen Sadeq ◽  
Israa Mohammed Hummudi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Back Ground ◽  
Soft Liner ◽  
Group 10 ◽  
Experimental Group

Back ground: Reduction of a durable bond to acrylic denture base is the main problem associated with soft liner materials. Purpose: Evaluation of the influence of addition of Ag-Zn Zeolite on shear bond strength of silicon cold cure   soft liner. Approach: thirty specimens   of silicon cold cure  soft liner were constructed for shear bond- strength test and divided into three groups: Control groups: 10 specimens without incorporation of Ag-Zn Zeolite, Experimental group: 10 specimens with 0.5% by weight of Ag-Zn Zeolite Experimental Group: 10 specimens with 0.75 %by weight of Ag-Zn Zeolite Plastic pattern of acrylic block with dimensions (75 mm length  x 25mm width x 5mm depth )was fabricated and evaluated by Instron testing machine. Results: Least significant difference of (0.75%) of Ag-Zn zeolite group was significantly different compared with the experimental group of (0.5% and control group) at p<0.05. Conclusion: The incorporation of 0.5%, 0.75% by weight into silicon cold cure soft liner had significant effect and causes improvement in shear bond strength.

scholarly journals Effect of Ozone and Two Common Denture Cleaners on Tensile Bond Strength and Surface Hardness of a Silicone Soft Liner

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammadreza Nakhaei ◽  
Amirtaher Mirmortazavi ◽  
Mansooreh Ghanbari ◽  
Zahra Ahmadi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Hardness Test ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Test Analysis ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Soft Liner ◽  
The Mean

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of ozone and two common denture cleansers on the surface hardness and bond strength of a silicone-based soft liner to acrylic denture base material. Materials and Methods: Sixty cylindrical specimens were fabricated using heat-cured poly-methyl methacrylate denture base resin. Three millimeters of the material was ground from the midsection and filled with the soft liner. The resilient liner specimens (n=40) used for the hardness test were 10 mm in diameter and 5 mm in height. Cylindrical and disc-shaped samples were randomly divided into four groups (37°C distilled water, Corega® tablets, 0.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), and a home ozone generator). To simulate six months of denture cleansing clinically, samples were placed in their cleanser once a day for six months according to the manufacturer’s instructions. All cylindrical specimens were placed under tension until failure in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/minute. For disc-shaped samples, hardness was measured using a Shore-A durometer. The results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Tukey's post hoc test. Results: The mean tensile bond strength was not significantly different among the studied groups (P>0.05). The mean hardness in the ozone and Corega tablet groups was significantly lower than that of the control and NaOCl groups (P<0.05). Conclusion: The type of denture cleanser does not affect the tensile bond strength of silicone soft liners. Home ozone generators and cleansing tablets have less effect on the hardness of soft denture liners compared to 0.5% NaOCl.

scholarly journals Comparing the Shear Bond Strength with Acrylic Teeth, Hardness, Surface Roughness and Cost-benefit of three Different Denture Base Materials

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 2181-2190
Author(s):  
Humam M. Al-somaiday ◽  
M. A. Mohammed Moudhaffer ◽  
Mahmood Jasim Alsamydai
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Base Materials ◽  
Us Dollar ◽  
Artificial Teeth

One of the major problem affecting the denture function is the detachment of the artificial teeth from denture as a result to the higher chewing capacity that will rise the risk of artificial teeth displacement. Displacement of the teeth may precede by changing in the material properties affecting the denture function that is why surface roughness and hardness considered as a predictor for the material behaviors and performance. Replacing a denture may cause a burden to the patients, hence, the material and fabrication coasts of dentures should be considered as one of the major factors affecting the selection of the denture base material, as in some cases a base material with impressive propertied limitedly used because of its expenses.[1] In this study, shear bond strength with acrylic teeth, hardness, surface roughness and the net benefits, associated with alternatives for achieving defined treatment objective, were evaluated by comparing some properties of three different denture base materials with the cost of each one in Iraq. A total of (90) specimens of polycarbonate, injectable acrylic and conventional heat cured acrylic were fabricated according to manufacturer’s instructions and divided into (3) groups, (30) specimens for each testing group i.e. the shear bond strength with acrylic teeth, shore D hardness and surface roughness (10 specimens for each testing material). the total cost of each specimens group was collected and calculated to evaluate the overall cost benefit of each material. Highly significant differences (P≤ 0.01) between all the (3) experimental materials were noticed after analyzing each test's results with descriptive statistical analysis, one-way ANOVA and post-hoc LSD, except for the shore D hardness whereas a non-significant differences(P> 0.05) between heat cured and injectable acrylic was found. The heat cured acrylic has the highest mean value of the shear bond strength with acrylic teeth (516.1 N) followed by the injectable acrylic with (329.9 N) mean value while the lowest mean value was for the Polycarbonate (180.1 N). Furthermore, the injectable acrylic has the highest mean value in shore D hardness (91.96), followed by the heat cured acrylic (91.5), then Polycarbonate (82.94). As for surface roughness, the Polycarbonate has the highest mean value (0.31703) followed by the injectable acrylic (0.2129), then the heat cured acrylic (0.10367). Finally, Polycarbonate has the highest mean value of the specimens’ cost in Iraq (10.022 US dollar /specimens), followed by the injectable acrylic (8.695 US dollar /specimens) then the heat cured acrylic (3.243 US dollar /specimens). All thermoplastic materials included in this study (Injectable acrylic and Polycarbonate) exhibited higher cost with lower properties in comparison with heat cured acrylic material for the selected tests.

scholarly journals Effect of ridge lap surface treatment and thermocycling on microtensile bond strength of acrylic teeth to denture base resins

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolina de Andrade Lima Chaves ◽  
Rômulo Rocha Regis ◽  
Ana Lucia Machado ◽  
Raphael Freitas de Souza
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Base Resin ◽  
Artificial Teeth ◽  
Polymer Type

This study evaluated the effect of denture base polymer type (heat- and microwave-polymerized), ridge lap surface treatment (with and without methyl methacrylate-MMA etching) and thermocycling on the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of Biotone acrylic teeth. Flat-ground, ridge-lap surface of posterior artificial teeth were bonded to cylinders of each denture base resin, resulting in the following groups (n=6): G1a - Clássico/with MMA etching; G1b - Clássico/without MMA etching; G2a - OndaCryl/with MMA etching; G2b - OndaCryl/without MMA etching. Rectangular bar specimens with a cross-sectional area of 1 mm² were prepared. Half of the bars in each group were thermocycled (5,000 cycles between 4ºC and 60ºC). µTBS testing was performed in an universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed statistically by three-way ANOVA (α=0.05). There was no statisticaly significant difference (p>0.05) for the factors (resin, surface treatment,and thermocycling) or their interactions. The mean µTBS values (MPa) and standard deviations were as follows: Thermocycling - G1a: 41.00 (14.00); G1b: 31.00 (17.00); G2a: 50.00 (27.00); G2b: 40.00 (18.00); No thermocycling - G1a: 37.00 (14.00); G1b: 43.00 (25.00); G2a: 43.00 (14.00); G2b: 40.00 (27.00). The µTBS of Biotone artificial teeth to the denture base acrylic resins was not influenced by the polymer type, surface treatment or thermocycling.

scholarly journals Bond Strength of Reline Resins to Aged-simulated Denture Base Acrylic Resin

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Alessandra Buhler Borges ◽  
Carlos Rocha Gomes Torres ◽  
Graziela Ribeiro Batista ◽  
Eduardo Bresciani ◽  
Erica Crastechini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Tensile Test ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Thermal Aging ◽  
Base Material ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Single Cone ◽  
One Way Anova

ABSTRACT Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of different direct reliners to acrylic resin for denture base. Materials and methods Double-cone specimens were made: HA-heat-cured acrylic resin-(n = 20); U-Ufi Gel Hard C-(n = 10); K: Kooliner-(n = 10); R-Rebase II Fast-(n = 10) and RH-Rebase II Fast + Resin Hardener-(n = 10). Ten HA samples were immediately submitted to cohesive test. The remaining HA samples and others were submitted to thermal aging (HAaged, 1000 cycles, 5.55oC), followed by tensile test. For tensile strength, 50 single cone-shaped samples were made of heat-cured acrylic resin and aged (HAaged, 1000 cycles, 5.55oC). After surface treatment, relining resin cones were build up using silicon molds, and stressed to failure. Values of cohesive and tensile strength were submitted to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 5%). Results Bond strength were: HA/HAaged: 21.17 (±4.89)a, U/HAaged: 11.56 (±1.98)b, R/HAaged: 9.69 (±2.37)b, RH/ HAaged: 9.38 (±1.78)bc and K/HAaged: 5.98 (±1.90)c. The cohesive strength were: KCoe: 22.29(±4.06)a; RCoe: 23.99 (±3.29)a; RHCoe: 24.84 (±3.88)a; UCoe: 25.62 (±3.03)a; HAaged: 36.06 (±8.65)b and HA:42.29 (±7.68)b. Groups followed by the same letters do not show differences. Conclusion Bond strength of acrylic resin to acrylic denture base material is higher than the reliners and Ufi Gel Hard C showed the higher bond strength. How to cite this article Zanatta RF, Batista GR, Crastechini É, Bresciani E, Borges AB, Torres CRG. Bond Strength of Reline Resins to Aged-simulated Denture Base Acrylic Resin. World J Dent 2016;7(1):1-5.

scholarly journals Assessment of the Tissue Response to Modification of the Surface of Dental Implants with Carboxyethylphosphonic Acid and Basic Fibroblastic Growth Factor Immobilization (Fgf-2): An Experimental Study on Minipigs

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 358
Author(s):  
Javier Aragoneses ◽  
Ana Suárez ◽  
Nansi López-Valverde ◽  
Francisco Martínez-Martínez ◽  
Juan Manuel Aragoneses
Keyword(s):  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Control Group ◽  
P Value ◽  
Implant Surface ◽  
Bone Contact ◽  
Bone Implant ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of implant surface treatment with carboxyethylphosphonic acid and fibroblast growth factor 2 on the bone–implant interface during the osseointegration period in vivo using an animal model. The present research was carried out in six minipigs, in whose left tibia implants were inserted as follows: eight implants with a standard surface treatment, for the control group, and eight implants with a surface treatment of carboxyethylphosphonic acid and immobilization of FGF-2, for the test group. At 4 weeks after the insertion of the implants, the animals were sacrificed for the histomorphometric analysis of the samples. The means of the results for the implant–bone contact variable (BIC) were 46.39 ± 17.49% for the test group and 34.00 ± 9.92% for the control group; the difference was not statistically significant. For the corrected implant–bone contact variable (BICc), the mean value of the test group was 60.48 ± 18.11%, and that for the control group, 43.08 ± 10.77%; the difference was statistically significant (p-value = 0.035). The new bone formation (BV/TV) showed average results of 27.28 ± 3.88% for the test group and 26.63 ± 7.90% for the control group, meaning that the differences were not statistically significant (p-value = 0.839). Regarding the bone density at the interthread level (BAI/TA), the mean value of the test group was 32.27 ± 6.70%, and that of the control group was 32.91 ± 7.76%, with a p-value of 0.863, while for the peri-implant density (BAP/TA), the mean value of the test group was 44.96 ± 7.55%, and that for the control group was 44.80 ± 8.68%, without a significant difference between the groups. The current research only found a significant difference for the bone–implant contact at the cortical level; therefore, it could be considered that FGF-2 acts on the mineralization of bone tissue. The application of carboxyethylphosphonic acid on the surface of implants can be considered a promising alternative as a biomimetic coating for the immobilization of FGF-2. Despite no differences in the new bone formation around the implants or in the interthread or peri-implant bone density being detected, the biofunctionalization of the implant surface with FGF-2 accelerates the mineralization of the bone–implant interface at the cortical level, thereby reducing the osseointegration period.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document