• Users Online: 1606
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
CATEGORY: ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 19

Comparative evaluation of tear strength and surface roughness of two maxillofacial silicone materials following disinfection: an invitro study


Indian Army

Date of Web Publication8-Jan-2021

Correspondence Address:
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.306366

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Lanzara R. Comparative evaluation of tear strength and surface roughness of two maxillofacial silicone materials following disinfection: an invitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2020;20, Suppl S1:19

How to cite this URL:
Lanzara R. Comparative evaluation of tear strength and surface roughness of two maxillofacial silicone materials following disinfection: an invitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc [serial online] 2020 [cited 2021 Feb 27];20, Suppl S1:19. Available from: https://www.j-ips.org/text.asp?2020/20/5/19/306366



Introduction: Maxillofacial defects compromise form, function and aesthetics. Rehabilitation of theses defects can be done either surgically or by using prosthesis. Silicone is the material of choice and prosthetic results are largely limited by mechanical properties of material used.

Methodology: In this study maxillofacial silicone materials M 511, Technovent (5 Yorkpark, Bridgend, UK) and Copsil T, COP (France) were compared. 60 test specimens were prepared following guidelines of American Standard test Material (ASTM) D624 for type C tear test specimen. Test specimens were divided into two groups (A and B) which included 30 test specimens of each silicone material (M 511, Technovent and Copsil T, COP) respectively. Initially 30 test specimens, (15 test specimens of each silicone material respectively, A1 and B1) were evaluated for tear strength and surface roughness. While remaining 30 specimens (15 test specimens of each silicone material respectively, A2 and B2) were disinfected with 4 percent chlorhexidine gluconate for a period of 30 hours and then evaluated.

Result: The mean tear strength of M 511, Technovent (11.74 ± 1.01 N/mm) was significantly more than Copsil T – 30 TN, COP (10.41 ± 0.72 N/mm). The mean surface roughness of M 511, Technovent (826.26 ± 154.01 nm) was significantly less than Copsil T, COP (1297.00 ± 227.61nm) There was significant decrease in tear strength following disinfection while no significant difference was observed on the surface roughness.

Conclusion: A significant decrease in tear strength was observed following disinfection suggesting a need to reinforce maxillofacial silicone prosthetic material and no significant difference was observed on the surface roughness following disinfection suggesting 4 percent chlorhexidine as a safe disinfecting agent.






 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed70    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded4    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]