• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Open Journal of Urology >A Comparative Assessment of the Surface Roughness of Thermoplastic Denture Base Resins Following Adjustment and Re-Polishing
【24h】

A Comparative Assessment of the Surface Roughness of Thermoplastic Denture Base Resins Following Adjustment and Re-Polishing

机译：调整和重新抛光后热塑性牙本质碱树脂表面粗糙度的比较评估

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose: This study assessed the roughness of two injection-molded, thermoplastic materials used for denture bases compared with a polyamide material and compression molded Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) after the adjustment and re-polishing with either a laboratory protocol or a chair side protocol. Methods: Forty specimens, each of PMMA, Valplast, DuraFlex, Dura Cetal were fabricated and finished according to individual manufactures’ instructions. These materials were adjusted with tungsten carbide (TC) burs to mimic gross adjustments, and then re-polished either on a lathe or bonded silicon carbide (B-SC). Following instrumentation, the specimens were assessed using contact profilometry and scanning electron microscopy. Two-factor ANOVA was used to determine significant differences in mean surface roughness (Ra and Rmax), with included factors being material type and re-polishing regimen. Results: Mean Ra values ranged from 0.26 (DuraFlex control) to 1.82 (Valplast adjusted with TC burs). Mean Rmax values ranged from 1.88 (Dura Flex control) to 13.76 (Valplast adjusted with TC burs). Two-factor ANOVA revealed that interaction of both factors was significant (p Ra and Rmax. There was a statistically significant increase in both Ra (p Rmax (p < 0.05) for all material types following the gross adjustment. With the exception of DuraFlex, re-polishing of samples that were previously adjusted with TC burs, on the dental lathe produced surfaces that were comparable to control samples. Conclusion: Adjustment of DuraFlex should be kept to a minimum since the adjustment produced the significant surface detriment that could not be corrected with either of the polishing regimens.
机译：目的：该研究评估了在调节和重新抛光后的聚酰胺材料和压缩模塑聚甲基丙烯酸酯（PMMA）与实验室方案或椅子侧方案进行了两种注射模制的热塑性材料的粗糙度。方法：根据个体制造商的说明，制造和完成50个标本，PMMA，PMMA，valplast，Duraflex，Dura缩水属。将这些材料用碳化钨（TC）孔调节，以模仿总调节，然后在车床或粘结的碳化硅（B-SC）上重新抛光。在仪器之后，使用触点轮廓测定和扫描电子显微镜评估样品。双因素Anova用于确定平均表面粗糙度（RA和Rmax）的显着差异，包括材料类型和重新抛光方案的因素。结果：平均RA值范围为0.26（DURAFLEX控制）至1.82（用TC BUS调整valplast）。平均RMAX值范围从1.88（Dura Flex Control）到13.76（用TC Burs调整的valplast）。双因素Anova揭示了两种因素的相互作用是显着的（P Ra和Rmax。rA（P rmax（P <0.05）的统计学上显着增加，所有物质类型都在调整后的所有材料类型。除了Duraflex，重新抛光先前用TC Burs调节的样品，在牙科车床产生的表面上与对照样品相当的表面。结论：杜拉克克隆的调整应保持最小，因为调整产生了无法纠正的显着表面损害与任何一个抛光方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号