The role of surface treatments on the bond between acrylic denture base and teeth
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.
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Digital revista |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
2009
|
| Online Access: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402009000200012 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|