Otro
Effect of disinfectants on the hardness and roughness of reline acrylic resins
Registro en:
Journal of Prosthodontics, v. 15, n. 4, p. 235-242, 2006.
1059-941X
1532-849X
10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00112.x
2-s2.0-33745576539
Autor
Azevedo, Andrea
Machado, Ana Lucia
Vergani, Carlos Eduardo
Giampaolo, Eunice Teresinha
Pavarina, Ana Claudia
Magnani, Romeo
Resumen
Purpose: Potential effects on hardness and roughness of a necessary and effective disinfecting regimen (1% sodium hypocholorite and 4% chlorhexidine) were investigated for two hard chairside reline resins versus a heat-polymerizing denture base acrylic resin. Materials and Methods: Two standard hard chairside reliners (Kooliner and Duraliner II), one heat-treated chairside reliner (Duraliner II +10 minutes in water at 55°C), and one standard denture base material (Lucitone 550) were exposed to two disinfecting solutions (1% sodium hypochlorite; 4% chlorhexidine gluconate), and tested for two surface properties [Vickers hardness number (VHN, kg/mm2); Roughness (Ra, μm)] for different times and conditions (1 hour after production, after 48 hours at 37 ± 2°C in water, after two disinfection cycles, after 7 days in disinfection solutions, after 7 days in water only). For each experimental condition, eight specimens were made from each material. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test, and Student's t-test (p= 0.05). Results: For Kooliner (from 6.2 ± 0.3 to 6.5 ± 0.5 VHN) and Lucitone 550 (from 16.5 ± 0.4 to 18.4 ± 1.7 VHN), no significant changes in hardness were observed either after the disinfection or after 7 days of immersion, regardless of the disinfectant solution used. For Duraliner II (from 4.0 ± 0.1 to 4.2 ± 0.1 VHN), with and without heat treatment, a small but significant increase in hardness was observed for the specimens immersed in the disinfectant solutions for 7 days (from 4.3 ± 0.2 to 4.8 ± 0.5 VHN). All materials showed no significant change in roughness (Kooliner: from 0.13 ± 0.05 to 0.48 ± 0.24 μm; Duraliner II, with and without heat treatment: from 0.15 ± 0.04 to 0.29 ± 0.07 μm; Lucitone 550: from 0.44 ± 0.19 to 0.49 ± 0.15 μm) after disinfection and after storage in water for 7 days. Conclusions: The disinfectant solutions, 1% sodium hypochlorite and 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, caused no apparent damage on hardness and roughness of the materials evaluated. Copyright © 2006 by The American College of Prosthodontists.
Materias
Ítems relacionados
Mostrando ítems relacionados por Título, autor o materia.
-
Evaluation of marginal microleakage in Class II cavities: Effect of microhybrid, flowable, and compactable resins
Peris, Alessandra Rezende; Duarte Jr., Sillas; Andrade, Marcelo Ferrarezi de -
Evaluation of marginal microleakage in Class II cavities: Effect of microhybrid, flowable, and compactable resins
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP); Univ. of MN School of Dentistry; Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) (2003-02-01)Objective: The goal of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage on the cementum/dentin and enamel surfaces in Class II restorations, using different kinds of resin composite (microhybrid, flowable, and compactable). ... -
Evaluation of marginal microleakage in Class II cavities: Effect of microhybrid, flowable, and compactable resins
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP); Univ. of MN School of Dentistry; Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) (2003-02-01)Objective: The goal of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage on the cementum/dentin and enamel surfaces in Class II restorations, using different kinds of resin composite (microhybrid, flowable, and compactable). ...