Kim Bong-Jun, Yang Hong-So, Chun Min-Geoung, Park Yeong-Joon
Graduate student, Department of Dental Materials and Research Center for Biomineralization Disorders, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Gwangju, Korea.
Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Gwangju, Korea.
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Nov;112(5):1289-97. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.018. Epub 2014 Jun 2.
Reduced softness and separation from the denture base are the most significant problems of long-term soft lining materials.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the durometer Shore A hardness and tensile bond strength of long-term soft denture lining materials and to investigate the correlation between these 2 properties.
A group of 7 soft lining materials, 6 silicone based (Dentusil, GC Reline Soft, GC Reline Ultrasoft, Mucopren Soft, Mucosoft, Sofreliner Tough) and 1 acrylic resin based (Durabase), were evaluated for durometer Shore A hardness and tensile bond strength to heat-polymerized denture base resin (Lucitone 199). A specially designed split mold and loading assembly with a swivel connector were used for the durometer Shore A hardness test and tensile bond strength test to improve accuracy and facilitate measurement. Three specimens of each product were stored in a 37°C water bath, and durometer Shore A hardness tests were carried out after 24 hours and 28 days. A tensile bond strength test was carried out for 10 specimens of each product, which were stored in a 37°C water bath for 24 hours before the test. Repeated-measures ANOVA, the Kruskal-Wallis and Duncan multiple range tests, and the Spearman correlation were used for statistical analyses.
The repeated-measures ANOVA found significant durometer Shore A hardness differences for the materials (P<.001) and the interaction effect (aging×materials) (P<.001). GC Reline Ultrasoft showed the lowest mean durometer Shore A hardness (21.30 ±0.29 for 24 hours, 34.73 ±0.47 for 28 days), and GC Reline Soft showed the highest mean durometer Shore A hardness (50.13 ±0.48 for 24 hours, 57.20 ±0.28 for 28 days). The Kruskal-Wallis test found a significant difference in the mean tensile bond strength values (P<.001). GC Reline Ultrasoft (0.82 ±0.32 MPa) and Mucopren Soft (0.96 ±0.46 MPa) had a significantly lower mean tensile bond strength (P<.05). GC Reline Soft had the highest mean tensile bond strength (2.99 ±0.43 MPa) (P<.05), and acrylic resin-based Durabase showed a significantly different tensile bond strength (1.32 ±0.16 MPa), except for Mucopren Soft, among the materials (P<.05). The tensile bond strength and Shore A hardness showed a statistically insignificant moderate positive correlation (r=0.571, P=.180 for Shore A hardness 24 hours versus tensile bond strength; r=0.607, P=.148 for Shore A hardness 28 days versus tensile bond strength).
Within the limitations of this study, significant differences were found in durometer Shore A hardness (with aging time) and tensile bond strength among the materials. Adhesive failure was moderately correlated with durometer Shore A hardness, especially after 28 days, but was not significant.
柔软度降低以及与义齿基托分离是长期使用的软衬材料最显著的问题。
本研究的目的是评估长期使用的软质义齿衬里材料的邵氏A硬度和拉伸粘结强度,并研究这两种性能之间的相关性。
评估一组7种软衬材料,其中6种为硅酮基(Dentusil、GC Reline Soft、GC Reline Ultrasoft、Mucopren Soft、Mucosoft、Sofreliner Tough)和1种丙烯酸树脂基(Durabase),测试其邵氏A硬度以及与热聚合义齿基托树脂(Lucitone 199)的拉伸粘结强度。使用专门设计的带有旋转连接器的分体模具和加载组件进行邵氏A硬度测试和拉伸粘结强度测试,以提高准确性并便于测量。每种产品的三个试样储存在37°C水浴中,24小时和28天后进行邵氏A硬度测试。对每种产品的10个试样进行拉伸粘结强度测试,测试前将其在37°C水浴中储存24小时。采用重复测量方差分析、Kruskal-Wallis和Duncan多重范围检验以及Spearman相关性分析进行统计分析。
重复测量方差分析发现材料之间的邵氏A硬度存在显著差异(P<.001)以及交互作用效应(老化×材料)(P<.001)。GC Reline Ultrasoft显示出最低的平均邵氏A硬度(24小时时为21.30±0.29,28天时为34.73±0.47),而GC Reline Soft显示出最高的平均邵氏A硬度(24小时时为50.13±0.48,28天时为57.20±0.28)。Kruskal-Wallis检验发现平均拉伸粘结强度值存在显著差异(P<.001)。GC Reline Ultrasoft(0.82±0.32 MPa)和Mucopren Soft(0.96±0.46 MPa)的平均拉伸粘结强度显著较低(P<.05)。GC Reline Soft的平均拉伸粘结强度最高(2.99±0.43 MPa)(P<.05),丙烯酸树脂基的Durabase在材料中显示出显著不同的拉伸粘结强度(1.32±0.16 MPa),除了Mucopren Soft(P<.05)。拉伸粘结强度与邵氏A硬度显示出统计学上不显著的中度正相关(邵氏A硬度24小时与拉伸粘结强度,r=0.571,P=.180;邵氏A硬度28天与拉伸粘结强度,r=0.607,P=.148)。
在本研究的局限性内,发现材料之间在邵氏A硬度(随老化时间)和拉伸粘结强度方面存在显著差异。粘结失败与邵氏A硬度呈中度相关,尤其是在28天后,但不显著。