Evaluation of peel bond strength between Plexiglas acrylic (PMMA) and maxillofacial silicone using three different primers
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: The bonding of maxillofacial silicone to acrylic resin is a critical issue when rehabilitating with implants retained maxillofacial prosthesis. The aim of this study was to evaluate 180˚ peel bond strength between prefabricated Plexiglas acrylic and maxillofacial silicone by using three different primers.
Material and Methods: The peel bond strength between maxillofacial silicone, A-2186 and Plexiglas acrylic resin was assessed by using three different primers (A-306, A-304 and A-330G). Specimens were divided into 3 groups according to the specific primer. All specimens were fabricated within Aluminum mold and evaluation of peel bond strength was done by Universal testing machine. One way ANOVA and Tukey’s test were used to analyze data with significance level set at 0.05. Modes of bond failures were assessed by visual inspection and categorized into cohesive, mixed and adhesive failures.
Results: There was significant impact of primers on bond strength between silicone A2186 and Plexiglas acrylic (p <0.05). The 180˚ peel bond strength ranged from 1.63 to 4.67N/mm among primers groups. The primer A-330 had the highest peel bond strength of 4.67N/mm among primers (p < 0.05). Cohesive failure was mainly found with primer A-330 while mixed and adhesive failures were predominantly seen in primer groups, A-306 and A-304 respectively. Conclusion: A-330 primer provided the highest 180˚ peel bond strength between prefabricated Plexiglas acrylic and silicone A-2186. Plexiglas acrylic might be used as an alternative material to conventional acrylic resin during fabrication of maxillofacial prosthesis.
Article Details
References
2. Wolfaardt, J., et al., Indications and methods of care for aspects of extraoral osseointegration. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2003. 32(2): p. 124-31.
3. Schoen, P.J., et al., Treatment outcome of bone-anchored craniofacial prostheses after tumor surgery. Cancer, 2001. 92(12): p. 3045-50.
4. Watson, R.M., T.J. Coward, and G.H. Forman, Results of treatment of 20 patients with implant-retained auricular prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1995. 10(4): p. 445-9.
5. Qudah, S., A. Harrison, and R. Huggett, Soft lining materials in prosthetic dentistry: a review. Int J Prosthodont, 1990. 3(5): p. 477-83.
6. Arkles, B., Tailoring surfaces with silanes. CHEMTECH, 1977. 7(12).
7. Mutluay, M.M. and I.E. Ruyter, Evaluation of bond strength of soft relining materials to denture base polymers. Dent Mater, 2007. 23(11): p. 1373-81.
8. Jebreil, K., Accetability of orbital prostheses. J Prosthet Dent, 1980. 43(1): p. 82-5.
9. Hooper, S.M., et al., Implant-supported facial prostheses provided by a maxillofacial unit in a U.K. regional hospital: longevity and patient opinions. J Prosthodont, 2005. 14(1): p. 32-8.
10. McMordie, R. and G.E. King, Evaluation of primers used for bonding silicone to denture base material. J Prosthet Dent, 1989. 61(5): p. 636-9.
11. Polyzois, G.L. and M.J. Frangou, Bonding of silicone prosthetic elastomers to three different denture resins. Int J Prosthodont, 2002. 15(6): p. 535-8.
12. Frangou, M.J., et al., Bonding of silicone extra-oral elastomers to acrylic resin: the effect of primer composition. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 2003. 11(3): p. 115-8.
13. Gibbs, C.H., et al., Occlusal forces during chewing and swallowing as measured by sound transmission. J Prosthet Dent, 1981. 46(4): p. 443-9.
14. HJD, R.M., Plastic surgery of head and neck; corrective and reconstructive rhinoplasty. 1st Edition ed. 1967: Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 548.
15. Feretis, C., et al., Endoscopic implantation of Plexiglas (PMMA) microspheres for the treatment of GERD. Gastrointest Endosc, 2001. 53(4): p. 423-6.
16. Murugan Ramalingam, P.V., Ugo Ripamonti, Wan-Ju Li, Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine: A Nano Approach. 2013: CRC Press. 592.
17. Hatamleh, M.M. and D.C. Watts, Bonding of maxillofacial silicone elastomers to an acrylic substrate. Dental Materials, 2010. 26(4): p. 387-395.
18. Shetty, U.S. and S.S. Guttal, Evaluation of bonding efficiency between facial silicone and acrylic resin using different bonding agents and surface alterations. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, 2012. 4(3): p. 121-126.
19. Al-Shammari, F.A.K., Effect of Different Primers on the Peel Bond Strength between Silicone Elastomer and Acrylic Resins. British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research, 2015. 8(12).
20. Chalian, V.A. and R.W. Phillips, Materials in maxillofacial prosthetics. J Biomed Mater Res, 1974. 8(4 Pt 2): p. 349-63.
21. al-Athel, M.S. and R.G. Jagger, Effect of test method on the bond strength of a silicone resilient denture lining material. J Prosthet Dent, 1996. 76(5): p. 535-40.
22. McCabe, J.F., T.E. Carrick, and H. Kamohara, Adhesive bond strength and compliance for denture soft lining materials. Biomaterials, 2002. 23(5): p. 1347-52.
23. Polyzois, G.L., A. Hensten-Pettersen, and A. Kullmann, An assessment of the physical properties and biocompatibility of three silicone elastomers. J Prosthet Dent, 1994. 71(5): p. 500-4.
24. Sanchez, R.A., et al., Comparison of the physical properties of two types of polydimethyl siloxane for fabrication of facial prostheses. J Prosthet Dent, 1992. 67(5): p. 679-82.
25. Minami, H., et al., Effect of surface treatment on the bonding of an autopolymerizing soft denture liner to a denture base resin. Int J Prosthodont, 2004. 17(3): p. 297-301.
26. Chang, P.P., et al., The effects of primers and surface bonding characteristics on the adhesion of polyurethane to two commonly used silicone elastomers. J Prosthodont, 2009. 18(1): p. 23-31.
27. Kutay, O., Comparison of tensile and peel bond strengths of resilient liners. J Prosthet Dent, 1994. 71(5): p. 525-31.
28. Tanimoto, Y., et al., Evaluation of adhesive properties of three resilient denture liners by the modified peel test method. Acta Biomater, 2009. 5(2): p. 764-9.
29. Hatamleh, M.M. and D.C. Watts, Fibre reinforcement enhances bonding of soft lining to acrylic dental and maxillofacial prostheses. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 2008. 16(3): p. 116-21.
30. Craig, R.G. and P. Gibbons, Properties of resilient denture liners. J Am Dent Assoc, 1961. 63: p. 382-90.
31. Waltimo, A. and M. Kononen, A novel bite force recorder and maximal isometric bite force values for healthy young adults. Scand J Dent Res, 1993. 101(3): p. 171-5.
32. Amin, W.M., A.M. Fletcher, and G.M. Ritchie, The nature of the interface between polymethyl methacrylate denture base materials and soft lining materials. Journal of Dentistry, 1981. 9(4): p. 336-346.