Loading...
Publication
Análise da rugosidade de superfície de resinas de provisórios em prótese fixa
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 916.69 KB | Adobe PDF |
Abstract(s)
INTRODUÇÃO: Durante o tratamento protético, as restaurações provisórias desempenham um papel fundamental, permitindo avaliar a estética, a função e o conforto antes da colocação das próteses definitivas. As resinas utilizadas nos provisórios podem ser acrílicas como o polimetilmetacrilato (PMMA), bis-acrílicas ou as novas resinas CAD/CAM (de fresagem ou de impressão 3D). A rugosidade média (Ra) da superfície das restaurações provisórias é uma propriedade física importante, pois influencia a adesão e a acumulação de placa microbiana. Superfícies mais rugosas têm uma maior propensão à formação de biofilme, o que pode resultar em inflamação nos tecidos gengivais e desenvolvimento de cáries nos dentes pilares. O principal objetivo deste estudo laboratorial é determinar a Ra de diferentes tipos de resina utilizados na confeção de provisórios em prótese fixa. MATERIAIS E MÉTODOS: Foram confecionados 20 provetes quadrangulares, 5 de cada tipo de resina (PMMA (Tab 2000, Kerr®, Suíça), resina bis-acrílica (Structur 3, VOCO®, Alemanha), resina de fresagem (Structur CAD, VOCO®, Alemanha) e resina de impressão 3D (Dental Sand, Harz Labs, Rússia)). Os 20 provetes de dimensões padronizadas (20x20x2mm) foram submetidos ao mesmo protocolo de polimento, utilizando discos 3MTM Sof-LexTM. A Ra foi avaliada em 6 locais distintos dos provetes com um perfilómetro de contacto e a média foi registada. Os dados obtidos foram sujeitos a análise estatística descritiva e inferencial para um limiar de significância de p<0,05. RESULTADOS: Os valores mais baixos de Ra foram registados na resina de fresagem (0,303µm) e os mais elevados na resina bis-acrílica (0.686µm), com diferenças estatisticamente significativas (p=0,000). Diferenças com significância estatística foram também encontradas entre a resina de fresagem e a de impressão 3D (p=0,004) e entre a resina acrílica e a bis-acrílica (p=0,011). Por outro lado, a resina impressa e a bis-acrílica (p=0,183), assim como a fresada e o PMMA (p=0,087) e o PMMA comparativamente com a impressa (p=1) não diferem entre si de forma significativa. CONCLUSÃO: Pelo seu valor de rugosidade mais baixo, podemos considerar que a resina de fresagem é uma boa opção clínica para provisórios de longa duração. Apesar de ser necessário mais evidência científica, pelos resultados obtidos, a utilização de resina bis-acrílica é desaconselhada neste tipo de restauração fixa provisória.
INTRODUCTION: During prosthetic treatment, provisional restorations play a fundamental role, allowing aesthetics, function and comfort to be assessed before the definitive prostheses are fitted. The resins used in provisionals can be acrylics such as polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), bis-acrylic resins or the new CAD/CAM resins (milling or 3D printing). The average roughness (Ra) of the surface of provisional restorations is an important physical property, as it influences adhesion and the accumulation of microbial plaque. Rougher surfaces are more prone to biofilm formation, which can result in inflammation in the gingival tissues and the development of caries in the abutment teeth. The main objective of this laboratory study was to determine the Ra of different types of resin used to make provisional fixed prostheses. METHODOLOGY: Twenty square specimens were made, 5 of each type of resin (PMMA (Tab 2000, Kerr®, Switzerland), bis-acrylic resin (Structur 3, VOCO®, Germany), milling resin (Structur CAD, VOCO®, Germany) and 3D printing resin (Dental Sand, Harz Labs, Russia)). The 20 standardized specimens (20x20x2mm) were subjected to the same polishing protocol using 3MTM Sof-LexTM discs. The Ra was assessed at 6 different locations on the specimens with a contact profilometer and the mean was recorded. The data obtained was subjected to descriptive and inferential statistical analysis at a significance threshold of p<0.05. RESULTS: The lowest Ra values were recorded in the milling resin (0.303µm) and the highest in the bis-acrylic resin (0.686µm), with statistically significant differences (p=0.000). Statistically significant differences were also found between milling and 3D printing resins (p=0.004) and between acrylic and bis-acrylic resins (p=0.011). On the other hand, the printed and bis-acrylic resins (p=0.183), as well as the milled and PMMA (p=0.087) and the PMMA compared to the printed resin (p=1) did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Due to its lower average roughness value, we can consider milling resin to be a good clinical option for long-term provisionals. Although more scientific evidence is needed, based on the results obtained, the use of bis-acrylic resin is not recommended for this type of provisional fixed restoration.
INTRODUCTION: During prosthetic treatment, provisional restorations play a fundamental role, allowing aesthetics, function and comfort to be assessed before the definitive prostheses are fitted. The resins used in provisionals can be acrylics such as polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), bis-acrylic resins or the new CAD/CAM resins (milling or 3D printing). The average roughness (Ra) of the surface of provisional restorations is an important physical property, as it influences adhesion and the accumulation of microbial plaque. Rougher surfaces are more prone to biofilm formation, which can result in inflammation in the gingival tissues and the development of caries in the abutment teeth. The main objective of this laboratory study was to determine the Ra of different types of resin used to make provisional fixed prostheses. METHODOLOGY: Twenty square specimens were made, 5 of each type of resin (PMMA (Tab 2000, Kerr®, Switzerland), bis-acrylic resin (Structur 3, VOCO®, Germany), milling resin (Structur CAD, VOCO®, Germany) and 3D printing resin (Dental Sand, Harz Labs, Russia)). The 20 standardized specimens (20x20x2mm) were subjected to the same polishing protocol using 3MTM Sof-LexTM discs. The Ra was assessed at 6 different locations on the specimens with a contact profilometer and the mean was recorded. The data obtained was subjected to descriptive and inferential statistical analysis at a significance threshold of p<0.05. RESULTS: The lowest Ra values were recorded in the milling resin (0.303µm) and the highest in the bis-acrylic resin (0.686µm), with statistically significant differences (p=0.000). Statistically significant differences were also found between milling and 3D printing resins (p=0.004) and between acrylic and bis-acrylic resins (p=0.011). On the other hand, the printed and bis-acrylic resins (p=0.183), as well as the milled and PMMA (p=0.087) and the PMMA compared to the printed resin (p=1) did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Due to its lower average roughness value, we can consider milling resin to be a good clinical option for long-term provisionals. Although more scientific evidence is needed, based on the results obtained, the use of bis-acrylic resin is not recommended for this type of provisional fixed restoration.
Description
Keywords
Prótese parcial fixa Prótese parcial provisória Desenho assistido por computador Propriedades de superfície Fixed partial denture Temporary partial denture Computer-aided design Surface properties
Pedagogical Context
Citation
Publisher
CC License
Without CC licence