• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry >Adhesive retention of silicone and chlorinated polyethylene for maxillofacial prostheses.
【24h】

Adhesive retention of silicone and chlorinated polyethylene for maxillofacial prostheses.

机译：用于颌面假体的硅酮和氯化聚乙烯的粘性保持力。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A key factor of a successful facial prosthesis is the retention of the prosthesis to the patient's skin, especially when there is no mechanical means and the retention depends primarily on medical skin adhesives. Studies determining which medical adhesives provide the best bond strength for maxillofacial prostheses are needed. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the force required to detach strips of Silastic Adhesive A/MDX4-4,210 silicone elastomer with a urethane liner (A/M-U) and experimental chlorinated polyethylene elastomer (CPE) from the skin of human subjects coated with a protective dressing using 1 of 2 medical adhesives. MATERIAL AND METHODS: With IRB approval, 8 A/M-U and CPE rubber strips (total of 208) were applied in a predetermined random order to the left and right ventral forearms of 26 human subjects. Skin-Prep Protective Dressing (SP) was applied to half of the sites just before Epithane-3 (E3) and Secure(2) Medical Adhesive (SMA) were used to adhere the strips. Strips were peeled 6 hours later in a universal testing machine at 10 cm/min. Data are reported in newton/meter (N/m). The data was compared using a 3-way, within-groups, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and the Fisher exact test (alpha=.05). Values for N/m under various conditions relating to the subjects were compared by the Tukey HSD Test for unequal N (alpha=.05). Data are reported as mean (SD). RESULTS: Statistical analysis revealed no differences (mean (SD)) and no significant interactions between the independent variables (A/M-U = 94.6 (62.1) and CPE = 98.4 (69.6) N/m, SP = 93.0 (58.8) and no SP = 99.8 (72.1) N/m, E3 = 97.6 (69.8) and SMA = 95.3 (61.8) N/m; P=.984). Debonding occurred at the skin interface for both adhesives, as evidenced by residue on prosthetic materials (Fisher exact test; P<.005). CONCLUSIONS: The adhesive bond strengths of both SMA and E3, with and without the presence of SP, were not significantly different between A/M-U and CPE maxillofacial prosthetic materials. Adhesive failure occurred at the skin interface.
机译：问题陈述：面部假体成功的关键因素是假体在患者皮肤上的保留，尤其是在没有机械手段且保留主要取决于医用皮肤粘合剂的情况下。需要研究确定哪种医用胶粘剂为颌面假体提供最佳的粘合强度。目的：本研究的目的是量化从涂有涂层的人类皮肤上剥离带有聚氨酯衬里（A / MU）和实验性氯化聚乙烯弹性体（CPE）的硅橡胶粘合剂A / MDX4-4,210硅橡胶弹性体条所需的力。使用2种医疗粘合剂中的1种作为防护敷料。材料和方法：经IRB批准，以26个预定的随机顺序将8条A / M-U和CPE橡胶条（共208条）应用到26位受试者的左右前臂。在使用Epithane-3（E3）和Secure（2）Medical Adhesive Adhesive（SMA）粘贴条之前，将Skin-Prep防护敷料（SP）应用于一半的部位。 6小时后，将其在通用测试机中以10cm / min的速度剥离。数据以牛顿/米（N / m）报告。使用三组组内多元方差分析（MANOVA）和Fisher精确检验（alpha = .05）对数据进行比较。通过Tukey HSD测试比较了与受试者有关的各种条件下的N / m值，得出N不相等（alpha = .05）。数据报告为平均值（SD）。结果：统计分析表明，自变量之间没有差异（均数（SD）），自变量之间无显着相互作用（A / MU = 94.6（62.1）和CPE = 98.4（69.6）N / m，SP = 93.0（58.8），无SP = 99.8（72.1）N / m，E3 = 97.6（69.8）和SMA = 95.3（61.8）N / m; P = .984）。两种粘合剂均在皮肤界面处发生剥离，这由修复材料上的残留物证明（Fisher精确测试; P <.005）。结论：A / M-U和CPE颌面假体材料在有无SP的情况下，SMA和E3的粘合强度均无显着差异。皮肤界面发生粘合失败。

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