Rui Li, Ahmed Al Mozayen, Tyler McCluskey, Wendy A Clark, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh
{"title":"软衬材料与CAD-CAM义齿基托材料的拉伸结合强度。","authors":"Rui Li, Ahmed Al Mozayen, Tyler McCluskey, Wendy A Clark, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and different denture base materials.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was conducted in accordance with ISO 23401:2023. A total of 288 rectangular specimens (10L × 10H × 20W mm) were fabricated from various denture base materials, including a heat-compression polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), two types of milled PMAA, and three types of 3D-printed resins, with bonding using two chairside soft reline materials (Coe-Soft and Lynal). Specimens were placed in distilled water for 24 h before applying tensile force at a 5 mm/min crosshead speed. The tensile bond strength values (MPa) were calculated at maximum tensile force (N) before failure. Two-way ANOVA and post hoc multiple comparison tests were used to assess the effect of denture base and soft reline materials on the tensile bond strength (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant difference in the tensile bond strength was found among the different types of denture base materials (p < 0.001), regardless of relining material type. Lynal-relined milled IvoBase demonstrated the highest tensile bond strength (0.5 ± 0.06 MPa), followed by Lynal-relined milled Lucitone (0.44 ± 0.03 MPa), both of which are clinically acceptable as they are equal or greater 0.44 MPa. The lowest tensile bond strength was detected in Lynal-relined 3D printed FotoDent (0.09 ± 0.02 MPa). Lynal exhibited significantly higher tensile bond strength (p < 0.05) than Coe-Soft soft reline material when bonded to PMMA bases; however, there was no significant difference between Lynal and Coe-Soft when bonded to 3D-printed base materials (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and denture bases is material-dependent, influenced by both the type of denture base material and the type of soft relining material used.</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tensile bond strength of soft relining materials to CAD-CAM denture base materials.\",\"authors\":\"Rui Li, Ahmed Al Mozayen, Tyler McCluskey, Wendy A Clark, Ramtin Sadid-Zadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jopr.13998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and different denture base materials.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was conducted in accordance with ISO 23401:2023. A total of 288 rectangular specimens (10L × 10H × 20W mm) were fabricated from various denture base materials, including a heat-compression polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), two types of milled PMAA, and three types of 3D-printed resins, with bonding using two chairside soft reline materials (Coe-Soft and Lynal). Specimens were placed in distilled water for 24 h before applying tensile force at a 5 mm/min crosshead speed. The tensile bond strength values (MPa) were calculated at maximum tensile force (N) before failure. Two-way ANOVA and post hoc multiple comparison tests were used to assess the effect of denture base and soft reline materials on the tensile bond strength (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant difference in the tensile bond strength was found among the different types of denture base materials (p < 0.001), regardless of relining material type. Lynal-relined milled IvoBase demonstrated the highest tensile bond strength (0.5 ± 0.06 MPa), followed by Lynal-relined milled Lucitone (0.44 ± 0.03 MPa), both of which are clinically acceptable as they are equal or greater 0.44 MPa. The lowest tensile bond strength was detected in Lynal-relined 3D printed FotoDent (0.09 ± 0.02 MPa). Lynal exhibited significantly higher tensile bond strength (p < 0.05) than Coe-Soft soft reline material when bonded to PMMA bases; however, there was no significant difference between Lynal and Coe-Soft when bonded to 3D-printed base materials (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and denture bases is material-dependent, influenced by both the type of denture base material and the type of soft relining material used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13998\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13998","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tensile bond strength of soft relining materials to CAD-CAM denture base materials.
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and different denture base materials.
Materials and methods: The study was conducted in accordance with ISO 23401:2023. A total of 288 rectangular specimens (10L × 10H × 20W mm) were fabricated from various denture base materials, including a heat-compression polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), two types of milled PMAA, and three types of 3D-printed resins, with bonding using two chairside soft reline materials (Coe-Soft and Lynal). Specimens were placed in distilled water for 24 h before applying tensile force at a 5 mm/min crosshead speed. The tensile bond strength values (MPa) were calculated at maximum tensile force (N) before failure. Two-way ANOVA and post hoc multiple comparison tests were used to assess the effect of denture base and soft reline materials on the tensile bond strength (α = 0.05).
Results: A significant difference in the tensile bond strength was found among the different types of denture base materials (p < 0.001), regardless of relining material type. Lynal-relined milled IvoBase demonstrated the highest tensile bond strength (0.5 ± 0.06 MPa), followed by Lynal-relined milled Lucitone (0.44 ± 0.03 MPa), both of which are clinically acceptable as they are equal or greater 0.44 MPa. The lowest tensile bond strength was detected in Lynal-relined 3D printed FotoDent (0.09 ± 0.02 MPa). Lynal exhibited significantly higher tensile bond strength (p < 0.05) than Coe-Soft soft reline material when bonded to PMMA bases; however, there was no significant difference between Lynal and Coe-Soft when bonded to 3D-printed base materials (p > 0.05).
Conclusions: The tensile bond strength between soft relining materials and denture bases is material-dependent, influenced by both the type of denture base material and the type of soft relining material used.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.