How will surface treatments affect the translucency of porcelain laminate veneers?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether surface treatments affect the translucency of laminate veneers with different shades and thicknesses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 224 disc-shaped ceramic veneers were prepared from A1, A3, HT (High Translucent) and HO (High Opaque) shades of IPS e.max Press (Ivoclar Vivadent) with 0.5 mm and 1.0 mm thicknesses. The ceramics were divided into four groups for surface treatments. Group C: no surface treatments; Group HF: etched with hydrofluoric acid; Group SB: sandblasted with 50-microm Al2O3; and Group L; irradiated with an Er;YAG laser. A translucent shade of resin cement (Rely X Veneer, 3M ESPE) was chosen for cementation. The color values of the veneers were measured with a colorimeter and translucency parameter (TP) values were calculated. A three-way ANOVA with interactions for TP values was performed and Bonferroni tests were used when appropriate (alpha=0.05). RESULTS: There were significant interactions between the surface treatments, ceramic shades and thicknesses (P=.001). For the 0.5-mm-thick specimens there were significant differences after the SB and L treatments. There was no significant difference between the HF and C treatments for any shades or thicknesses (P>.05). For the 1-mm-thick ceramics, there was only a significant difference between the L and C treatments for the HT shade ceramics (P=.01). There were also significant differences between the SB and C treatments except not for the HO shades (P=.768). CONCLUSION: The SB and L treatments caused laminate veneers to become more opaque; however, HF treatment did not affect the TP values. When the laminate veneers were thinner, both the shade of the ceramic and the SB and laser treatments had a greater effect on the TP values.

Erratum: How will surface treatments affect the translucency of porcelain laminate veneers?

There are some corrections in the body of the article.

Peel strength of denture liner to PMMA and polyamide: laser versus air-abrasion

PURPOSE: This study investigated the effect of laser parameters and air-abrasion on the peel strength of silicon-based soft denture liner to different denture resins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Specimens (N=180) were prepared out of three different denture base resins (Rodex, cross-linked denture base acrylic resin; Paladent, heat-cured acrylic resin; Deflex, Polyamide resin) (75 mm x 25 mm x 3 mm). A silicon-based soft denture liner (Molloplast B) was applied to the denture resins after the following conditioning methods: a) Air-abrasion (50 microm), b) Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Waterlase MD Turbo, Biolase Technology) at 2 W-20 Hz, c) Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 2 W-30 Hz, d) Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 3 W-20 Hz, e) Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 3 W-30 Hz. Non-conditioned group acted as the control group. Peel test was performed in a universal testing machine. Failure modes were evaluated visually. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha=.05). RESULTS: Denture liner tested showed increased peel strength after laser treatment with different parameters (3.9+/-0.4 - 5.58+/-0.6 MPa) compared to the control (3.64+/-0.5 - 4.58+/-0.5 MPa) and air-abraded groups (3.1+/-0.6 - 4.46+/-0.3 MPa), but the results were not statistically significant except for Paladent, with the pretreatment of Er,Cr:YSGG laser at 3 W-20 Hz. Polyamide resin after air-abrasion showed significantly lower peel strength than those of other groups (3.1+/-0.6 MPa). CONCLUSION: Heat-cured acrylic resin, PMMA, may benefit from Er,Cr:YSGG laser treatment at 3 W-20 Hz irradiation. Air-abrasion of polyamide resins should be avoided not to impair their peel bond strengths to silicon-based soft denture liners.

The effect of acrylamide incorporation on the thermal and physical properties of denture resins

PURPOSE: Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) is the most commonly used denture base material despite typically low in strength. The purpose of this study was to improve the physical properties of the PMMA based denture base resins (QC-20, Dentsply Ltd., Addlestone, UK; Stellon, AD International Ltd, Dentsply, Switzerland; Acron MC; GC Lab Technologies Inc., Alsip, Japan) by copolymerization mechanism. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Control group specimens were prepared according to the manufacturer recommendations. In the copolymer groups; resins were prepared with 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% acrylamide (AAm) (Merck, Hohenbrunn, Germany) content according to the moleculer weight ratio, respectively. Chemical structure was characterized by a Bruker Vertex-70 Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) (Bruker Optics Inc., Ettlingen, Germany). Hardness was determined using an universal hardness tester (Struers Duramin, Struers A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) equipped with a Vickers diamond penetrator. The glass transition temperature (Tg) of control and copolymers were evaluated by Perkin Elmer Diamond DSC (Perkin Elmer, Massachusetts,USA). Statistical analyses were carried out using the statistical package SPSS for Windows, version 15.0 (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). The results were tested regarding the normality of distribution with the Shapiro Wilk test. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey test (P<.01). RESULTS: The copolymer synthesis was confirmed by FTIR spectroscopy. Glass transition temperature of the copolymer groups were higher than the control groups of the resins. The 10%, 15% and 20% copolymer groups of Stellon presented significantly higher than the control group in terms of hardness. 15% and 20% copolymer groups of Acron MC showed significantly higher hardness values when compared to the control group of the resin. Acrylamide addition did not affect the hardness of the QC-20 resin significantly. CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that copolymerization of PMMA with AAm increased the hardness value and glass transition temperature of PMMA denture base resins.