Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, 34 Henri-Dunant Road, Pathumwan, Bangkok, 10300, Thailand.
Department of Family and Community Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Suthep Road, Suthep, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand.
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Aug 25;24(1):1000. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04776-8.
Digitally fabricated dentures may require relining due to continual alveolar ridge resorption. However, studies evaluating the tensile bond strength (TBS) of digitally fabricated dentures bonded to denture liners are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the TBS of autopolymerized, heat-polymerized, milled, and 3D printed denture base materials bonded to 2 acrylic-based and 2 silicone-based denture liners, both before and after thermocycling. Additionally, the impact of thermocycling on the TBS were also evaluated.
The TBS of 4 different denture base materials (Palapress (PL), Vertex Rapid Simplified (VR), Smile CAM total prosthesis (SC), and NextDent denture 3D+ (ND)) bonded to 2 acrylic-based (GC Soft-Liner (GC) and Tokuyama Rebase II (RB)) and 2 silicone-based (Ufi Gel P (UP) and Sofreliner Tough M (ST)) denture liners were tested. Specimens (n = 8) were divided into non-thermocycling and thermocycling groups. Non-thermocycling specimens were tested after 24-hours water immersion, while thermocycling specimens were underwent 5000 cycle and were immediately tested. Mode of failure was examined under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (α = 0.05), and independent samples t test (α = 0.05) for TBS between non-thermocycling and thermocycling groups.
For the non-thermocycling groups, within the same denture liner material, no significant differences were found between denture base materials, except the ND + RB group, which had significantly lower TBS. For the thermocycling groups, within the same denture liner material, the TBS in the PL group exhibited the highest and the ND group exhibited the lowest. Within the same denture base material, in both non-thermocycling and thermocycling groups, the TBS in the ST group exhibited the highest; in contrast, that in the GC group exhibited the lowest. No significant differences were observed in TBS between non-thermocycling and thermocycling groups, except for denture base materials bonded to the ST group, SC + UP, and ND + UP groups.
Milled denture base can be relined with acrylic-based or silicone-based denture liner. However, cautions should be exercised when relining 3D printed denture base. Thermocycling did not affect TBS between acrylic-based denture liners and denture bases. In contrast, it affected the bond between silicone-based denture liner and denture base.
数字化制作的义齿可能需要重新衬垫，因为牙槽嵴会持续吸收。然而，评估数字化制作的义齿与义齿衬垫结合的拉伸结合强度（TBS）的研究还很少。本研究旨在评估自聚、热聚、铣削和 3D 打印义齿基底材料与 2 种丙烯酸基和 2 种硅基义齿衬垫在热循环前后的 TBS。此外，还评估了热循环对 TBS 的影响。
测试了 4 种不同义齿基底材料（Palapress（PL）、Vertex Rapid Simplified（VR）、Smile CAM 总修复体（SC）和 NextDent 义齿 3D+（ND））与 2 种丙烯酸基（GC Soft-Liner（GC）和 Tokuyama Rebase II（RB））和 2 种硅基（Ufi Gel P（UP）和 Sofreliner Tough M（ST））义齿衬垫结合的 TBS。试件（n=8）分为非热循环和热循环组。非热循环试件在 24 小时水浸泡后进行测试，而热循环试件则经过 5000 次循环后立即进行测试。在立体显微镜下检查失效模式。使用 2 因素方差分析和 Tukey HSD 检验（α=0.05）以及独立样本 t 检验（α=0.05）分析 TBS 数据，比较非热循环和热循环组之间的差异。
对于非热循环组，在相同的义齿衬垫材料内，除了 ND+RB 组外，不同义齿基底材料之间没有显著差异，而 ND+RB 组的 TBS 显著较低。对于热循环组，在相同的义齿衬垫材料内，PL 组的 TBS 最高，ND 组的 TBS 最低。在相同的义齿基底材料内，无论是在非热循环还是热循环组，ST 组的 TBS 最高，而 GC 组的 TBS 最低。除了与 ST 组、SC+UP 和 ND+UP 组结合的义齿基底材料外，非热循环和热循环组之间的 TBS 没有显著差异。
可以使用丙烯酸基或硅基义齿衬垫重新衬垫铣削义齿基底。然而，在衬垫 3D 打印义齿基底时需要谨慎。热循环不会影响丙烯酸基义齿衬垫和义齿基底之间的 TBS。相反，它会影响硅基义齿衬垫和义齿基底之间的结合。
