UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Effect of physicochemical surface treatments on the bond strength and adhesion of porcelain denture teeth to heat-polymerized acrylic resin denture base material


Sipahi, Cumhur; Özcan, Mutlu; Piskin, Bülent (2012). Effect of physicochemical surface treatments on the bond strength and adhesion of porcelain denture teeth to heat-polymerized acrylic resin denture base material. The Journal of Adhesion, 88(2):200-212.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of physicochemical surface treatments on the adhesive bond strength of porcelain denture teeth (PDT) to acrylic resin denture base material (PMMA). Totally, 100 PDT specimens, 50 with retentive palatal pins (+P) and 50 without pins (−P), were selected and assigned to 10 experimental groups (n = 10). Control groups CON-P and CON + P, did not receive any treatment. Groups SB + P and SB-P were sandblasted, groups SB/AE + P and SB/AE-P were sandblasted and acid-etched, groups TSC + P and TSC-P were tribochemically silica-coated, and groups FB + P and FB-P were covered with fibers. Cylindrical PMMA rods were polymerized onto treated palatal PDT surfaces. Force (N) was applied on palatal incisal edges of PDT specimens until debonding of PMMA. Obtained data were statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni corrected Mann Whitney U tests. The significance level was set at (p < .05). Mean force values of test groups ranged in descending order as follows: TSC+P (132.5 N ± 26.5), SB+P (113.5 N ± 47.5), SB/AE+P (112.2 N ± 26.1), CON+P (103.1 N ± 39.6), TSC-P (90.6 N ± 22.2), FB+P (77.7 N ± 18.3), SB/AE-P (47.6 N ± 10.5), SB-P (18.1 N ± 4.0), CON-P (4.6 N ± 5.4), and FB-P (0.0 N ± 0.0). No significant difference was found between groups with pins (+P) except group FB+P which displayed lower values than CON+P (p < .024), and TSC+P (p < 045). Groups (+P) showed significantly higher bond strength values than groups (−P) except for group TSC-P (p < .09 and p < 1). In groups without pins (P−), differences between groups were significant and ranged as follows: TSC-P>SB/AE-P (p < .0094), SB/AE-P > SB-P (p < .007), and SB-P > CON-P (p < .0013). Groups CON-P and FB-P did not show differences (p ≤ 1). Groups (+P) displayed higher bond strength values than groups (−P). SB-P, SB/AE-P, and TSC-P increased the adhesive bond between PDT and PMMA, respectively. Fiber coating negatively affected the bond.

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of physicochemical surface treatments on the adhesive bond strength of porcelain denture teeth (PDT) to acrylic resin denture base material (PMMA). Totally, 100 PDT specimens, 50 with retentive palatal pins (+P) and 50 without pins (−P), were selected and assigned to 10 experimental groups (n = 10). Control groups CON-P and CON + P, did not receive any treatment. Groups SB + P and SB-P were sandblasted, groups SB/AE + P and SB/AE-P were sandblasted and acid-etched, groups TSC + P and TSC-P were tribochemically silica-coated, and groups FB + P and FB-P were covered with fibers. Cylindrical PMMA rods were polymerized onto treated palatal PDT surfaces. Force (N) was applied on palatal incisal edges of PDT specimens until debonding of PMMA. Obtained data were statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Bonferroni corrected Mann Whitney U tests. The significance level was set at (p < .05). Mean force values of test groups ranged in descending order as follows: TSC+P (132.5 N ± 26.5), SB+P (113.5 N ± 47.5), SB/AE+P (112.2 N ± 26.1), CON+P (103.1 N ± 39.6), TSC-P (90.6 N ± 22.2), FB+P (77.7 N ± 18.3), SB/AE-P (47.6 N ± 10.5), SB-P (18.1 N ± 4.0), CON-P (4.6 N ± 5.4), and FB-P (0.0 N ± 0.0). No significant difference was found between groups with pins (+P) except group FB+P which displayed lower values than CON+P (p < .024), and TSC+P (p < 045). Groups (+P) showed significantly higher bond strength values than groups (−P) except for group TSC-P (p < .09 and p < 1). In groups without pins (P−), differences between groups were significant and ranged as follows: TSC-P>SB/AE-P (p < .0094), SB/AE-P > SB-P (p < .007), and SB-P > CON-P (p < .0013). Groups CON-P and FB-P did not show differences (p ≤ 1). Groups (+P) displayed higher bond strength values than groups (−P). SB-P, SB/AE-P, and TSC-P increased the adhesive bond between PDT and PMMA, respectively. Fiber coating negatively affected the bond.

Citations

1 citation in Web of Science®
1 citation in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

67 downloads since deposited on 26 Feb 2013
9 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2012
Deposited On:26 Feb 2013 13:31
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 16:38
Publisher:Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN:0021-8464
Additional Information:This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in [include the complete citation information for the final version of the article as published in the The Journal of Adhesion, 06 Feb 2012. Copyright Taylor & Francis, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00218464.2012.648874.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2012.648874
Permanent URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-75642

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 9MB
View at publisher
[img]
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 287kB

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations