|
An Evaluation of the Effect of Surface Treatment on the Bond Strength of Soft Denture Liners
C Swapna1, MT Hareesh2, M Renjith3, Afsa Ahmed4, Irene Ann Abraham4, M Gopinathan5
1 Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, KMCT Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
2 Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, KMCT Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
3 Reader, Department of Prosthodontics, KMCT Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
4 PG Student, Department of Prosthodontics, KMCT Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
5 Former Professor and Principal, Department of Prosthodontics, Government Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
Correspondence Address:
C Swapna
Department of Prosthodontics, KMCT Dental College, Calicut, Kerala, India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
|
|
Background: The search for soft liners has narrowed down to
polymers. The guiding principle being that polymers, though
all have a characteristic property called glass transition temperature. Much controversy exists as to whether these materials are temporary or permanent. Because currently available materials do not meet all of the essential requirements for the ideal material, they are generally considered to be temporary expedients for the immediate solution of specific denture problems.
Materials and Methods: An in vitro study was carried out to the effect of surface treatment on the bond strength of soft liners. Poly methyl metha acrylate specimens were prepared and placed under four categories: (1) Control, (2) sandblasted with μ aluminum oxide particles, (3) sandblasted with 150 μ aluminum oxide particles, and (4) sandblasted with 250 μ aluminum oxide particles.
Results: The soft liners used are Molloplast-B (Heat polymerizing), VLC soft reline material (Light polymerizing), and GC soft liner (Auto polymerizing). All the liners showed decrease in tensile strength and an increase in shear bond strength after sandblasting. There is no significant difference in bond strength when treated with different particle sizes.
Conclusion: Soft lining materials were applied to these surfaces and tensile and shear bond strength tests were performed. The results obtained were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance. Tensile bond strength showed a decreased value after sandblasting, regardless of the material. Shear bond strength showed an increased value after sandblasting regardless of the material. No significant difference in the bond strength when treated with different particle sizes of aluminum oxide. |
