ABSTRACT
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Analysis of the wear coefficient (k) of the superficial and deep layers of acrylic resin teeth can help predict denture durability, but little has been published on the wear coefficient of denture teeth. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the k value for the superficial and deep layers of the acrylic resin teeth of 6 different brands by using the fixed-ball microabrasive wear method. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six artificial tooth specimens of 4 commercial brands were tested: Artiplus IPN (Ar), Biotone IPN (Bi), Magister (Ma), Premium (Pr), Trilux (Tr), and SR Vivodent (Vi). Two specimens from each brand were created, one for the superficial layer and the other for the deep layer. The test was performed on fixed-ball microabrasive wear equipment set to operate at a constant normal force of 0.5 N and a rotation speed of 100 rpm. The test time periods were 5.00, 8.33, and 11.66 minutes. The characteristics of the wear craters were measured by using an optical microscope at a magnification of ×50 and Leica Microsystems software. Wear coefficient (k) values were deduced by using the Archard equation for abrasive wear, Q=k·N, and were analyzed by using 1-way analysis of variance, complemented by the Tukey HSD test (α=.05). A different analysis was used for each layer. RESULTS: The analysis of variance of the wear coefficient revealed significant differences among the groups regarding the superficial layers (P=.009). The Tukey HSD test showed that the k values for the superficial layers of Artiplus specimens were significantly lower than those of the Vivodent and Magister specimens. CONCLUSIONS: One brand (Ar) presented significantly lower wear coefficient value for the surface layer. No difference in wear coefficient values was found among the tooth brands for the deep layer.
Subject(s)
Acrylic Resins , Tooth, Artificial , Dentures , Materials Testing , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Data on the interaction between the etonogestrel (ENG) implant and antiretroviral therapy are lacking. We evaluated the effect of 2 highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) regimens (1 including efavirenz and the other ritonavir-boosted lopinavir) on the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of an ENG-releasing implant in HIV-positive women. DESIGN: Prospective nonrandomized PK study. METHODS: Forty-five HIV-positive women who desired to use ENG implants were included: 15 had received zidovudine/lamivudine + lopinavir/ritonavir for ≥3 months (LPV/r-based HAART group), 15 had received zidovudine/lamivudine + efavirenz for ≥3 months (EFV-based HAART group), and 15 had not received HAART (non-HAART group). PK parameters were measured using ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry at baseline and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks after implant placement. RESULTS: The EFV-based HAART regimen was associated with a reduction in the bioavailability of ENG, which showed decreases of 63.4%, 53.7%, and 70% in the area under the curve (AUC), maximum concentration (Cmax), and minimum concentration (Cmin) of ENG, respectively, compared with the non-HAART group. The LPV/r-based HAART regimen was associated with an increase in ENG bioavailability, which showed 52%, 60.6%, and 33.8% increases in the ENG AUC, Cmax, and Cmin, respectively, compared with the non-HAART group. CONCLUSIONS: The coadministration of EFV decreased the bioavailability of ENG released from the implant, which could impair contraceptive efficacy. However, the coadministration of LPV/r increased the bioavailability of ENG released from the implant, which suggests that this antiretroviral combination does not impair the ENG implant efficacy.
