Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers: An in-vitro Study.

Journal of Dental Biomaterial Pub Date : 2016-06-01
Moshkelgosha V, Shomali M, Momeni M
{"title":"Comparison of Wear Resistance of Hawley and Vacuum Formed Retainers: An in-vitro Study.","authors":"Moshkelgosha V,&nbsp;Shomali M,&nbsp;Momeni M","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of problem: </strong>As a physical property, wear resistance of the materials used in the fabrication of orthodontic retainers play a significant role in the stability and long term use of the appliances.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the wear resistance of two commonly used materials for orthodontic retainers: Acropars OP, i.e. a polymethyl methacrylate based material, and 3A-GS060, i.e. a polyethylene based material.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>For each material, 30 orthodontic retainers were made according to the manufacturers' instructions and a 30×30×2 mm block was cut out from the mid- palatal area of each retainer. Each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of wear stimulation in a pin on disc machine. The depth of wear of each specimen was measured using a Nano Wizard II atomic force microscope in 3 random points of each specimen's wear trough. The average of these three measurements was calculated and considered as mean value wear depth of each specimen (µm).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean wear depth was 6.10µm and 2.15µm for 3A-GS060 and Acropars OP groups respectively. Independent t-test showed a significant difference between the two groups (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The results show Polymethyl methacrylate base (Acropars) is more wear resistance than the polyethylene based material (3A-GS060).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>As the higher wear resistance of the fabrication material can improve the retainers' survival time and its cost-effectiveness, VFRs should be avoided in situations that the appliance needs high wear resistance such as bite blocks opposing occlusal forces.</p>","PeriodicalId":53341,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Biomaterial","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f1/5b/JDB-3-248.PMC5608059.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Biomaterial","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Statement of problem: As a physical property, wear resistance of the materials used in the fabrication of orthodontic retainers play a significant role in the stability and long term use of the appliances.

Objectives: To evaluate the wear resistance of two commonly used materials for orthodontic retainers: Acropars OP, i.e. a polymethyl methacrylate based material, and 3A-GS060, i.e. a polyethylene based material.

Materials and methods: For each material, 30 orthodontic retainers were made according to the manufacturers' instructions and a 30×30×2 mm block was cut out from the mid- palatal area of each retainer. Each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of wear stimulation in a pin on disc machine. The depth of wear of each specimen was measured using a Nano Wizard II atomic force microscope in 3 random points of each specimen's wear trough. The average of these three measurements was calculated and considered as mean value wear depth of each specimen (µm).

Results: The mean wear depth was 6.10µm and 2.15µm for 3A-GS060 and Acropars OP groups respectively. Independent t-test showed a significant difference between the two groups (p < 0.001). The results show Polymethyl methacrylate base (Acropars) is more wear resistance than the polyethylene based material (3A-GS060).

Conclusions: As the higher wear resistance of the fabrication material can improve the retainers' survival time and its cost-effectiveness, VFRs should be avoided in situations that the appliance needs high wear resistance such as bite blocks opposing occlusal forces.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

霍利固位器与真空成形固位器的耐磨性比较。
问题陈述:正畸固位器材料的耐磨性作为一种物理性质,对矫治器的稳定性和长期使用起着重要的作用。目的:评价正畸固位器常用的两种材料Acropars OP(聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯基材料)和3A-GS060(聚乙烯基材料)的耐磨性。材料和方法:每种材料按照制造商的说明制作30个正畸固位器,并在每个固位器的中腭区切出一个30×30×2 mm的块。每个样品在针盘式机器中进行了1000次磨损刺激。使用纳米向导II原子力显微镜在每个试样的磨损槽的3个随机点上测量每个试样的磨损深度。计算这三个测量值的平均值,作为每个试件的平均磨损深度(µm)。结果:3A-GS060组和Acropars OP组的平均磨损深度分别为6.10µm和2.15µm。独立t检验显示两组间差异有统计学意义(p < 0.001)。结果表明,聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯基材料(Acropars)的耐磨性优于聚乙烯基材料(3A-GS060)。结论:由于制作材料的高耐磨性可以提高固位器的生存时间和成本效益,因此在咬合阻力相反的咬合块等对耐磨性要求较高的情况下,应避免使用vfr。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信