Contact angle of unset elastomeric impression materials.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Some elastomeric impression materials are hydrophobic, and it is often necessary to take definitive impressions of teeth coated with some saliva. New hydrophilic materials have been developed. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare contact angles of water and saliva on 7 unset elastomeric impression materials at 5 time points from the start of mixing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two traditional polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) (Aquasil, Take 1), 2 modified PVS (Imprint 4, Panasil), a polyether (Impregum), and 2 hybrid (Identium, EXA'lence) materials were compared. Each material was flattened to 2 mm and a 5 µL drop of distilled water or saliva was dropped on the surface at 25 seconds (t0) after the start of mix. Contact angle measurements were made with a digital microscope at initial contact (t0), t1=2 seconds, t2=5 seconds, t3=50% working time, and t4=95% working time. Data were analyzed with a generalized linear mixed model analysis, and individual 1-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD post hoc tests (α=.05). RESULTS: For water, materials grouped into 3 categories at all time-points: the modified PVS and one hybrid material (Identium) produced the lowest contact angles, the polyether material was intermediate, and the traditional PVS materials and the other hybrid (EXA'lence) produced the highest contact angles. For saliva, Identium, Impregum, and Imprint 4 were in the group with the lowest contact angle at most time points. CONCLUSION: Modified PVS materials and one of the hybrid materials are more hydrophilic than traditional PVS materials when measured with water. Saliva behaves differently than water in contact angle measurement on unset impression material and produces a lower contact angle on polyether based materials.

An electrochemical investigation of TMJ implant metal alloys in an artificial joint fluid environment: the influence of pH variation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the corrosion behaviour of commonly used TMJ implants alloys (CoCrMo and Ti6Al4V) under simulated physiological conditions. METHODS: Corrosion behaviour was evaluated using standard electrochemical corrosion techniques and galvanic corrosion techniques as per ASTM standards. Standard electrochemical tests (E(corr), I(corr), R(p) and C(f)) were conducted in bovine calf serum (BCS), as a function of alloys type and different pHs. Galvanic corrosion tests were conducted in BCS at a pH of 7.6. Alloy surfaces were characterized using white-light interferometry (WLI) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS: The potentiodynamic test results exhibited the enhanced passive layer growth and a better corrosion resistance of Ti6Al4V compared to CoCrMo. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy measurements demonstrated the influence of protein as a function of pH on corrosion mechanisms/kinetics. Galvanic coupling was not a major contributor to corrosion. SEM and WLI images demonstrated a significantly higher in surface roughness in CoCrMo after corrosion. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that Ti6Al4V shows superior corrosion behaviour to CoCrMo due to its strong passive layer, simulated joint fluid components can affect the electrochemical nature of the metal/electrolyte interface as a function of pH, and the galvanic effect of coupling CoCrMo and Ti6Al4V in a single joint is weak.