| Literature DB >> 23606978 |
Ayman A Al-Dharrab1, Seham B Tayel, Mona H Abodaya.
Abstract
Objective. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different storage solutions that simulate acidic, alkaline, and sebum conditiions on the physical properties of pigmented (colorant elastomer) cosmesil M511 maxillofacial prosthetic material. Materials and Methods. Sixty specimens were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions and were tested before and after immersion of different storage conditions for six months at 37 °C. The following tests were performed: color changes (group I), solution absorption (group II), surface roughness (group III), and scanning electron microscopy (group IV). Results. There were no significant changes observed in the color and solution absorption tests while surface roughness revealed significant difference between control group and other testing storage medium groups, and this result was supported by SEM analysis that revealed limited surface changes. Conclusions. Cosmaseil material is an acceptable cross-linked formulation that withstands storage in different solutions with variable pH. The addition of pigment cannot vary the physical properties of these materials. Surface roughness test as well as SEM microscopic study showed moderate changes indicating a limited effect on the surface of the material.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23606978 PMCID: PMC3625596 DOI: 10.1155/2013/582051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Dent ISSN: 2090-4371
Figure 1M511 silicon maxillofacial rubber material.
Figure 2Cosmesil pigments coloring agents.
The different storage solutions' composition.
| Subgroup (a) | Acidic perspiration (pH5.5) containing per liter of distilled water: 0.5 g L-histidine monohydrochloride monohydrate, 5 g sodium chloride, and 2.2 g sodium dihydrogen orthophosphate dehydrate. |
|
| |
| Subgroup (b) | Alkaline perspiration (pH 8) containing the following per liter of distilled water: 0.5 g L-histidine monohydrochloride monohydrate, 5 g sodium chloride, and 5 g disodium hydrogen orthophosphate dodecahydrate. |
|
| |
| Subgroup (c) | Simulated sebum was prepared [ |
Both solutions (a) and (b) were prepared according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) specification [25].
Figure 3Ring mold.
Figure 4Absorption test specimens in the desiccators.
Figure 5X-rite sphere spectrophotometer.
The percentage of solutions' absorption of M511 silicone maxillofacial material of group I.
| Parameter | Subgroups after immersion in storage condition | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | c | |
| Mean ± SD | 0.04 ± 0.02 | 0.03 ± 0.02 | 0.03 ± 0.02 |
|
Fr
| 0.854 | ||
|
| 0.500 | 0.345 | |
|
| 0.465 | ||
Fr: Friedman test.
P 1: P value for Wilcoxon signed ranks test between stage a and each other period.
P 2: P value for Wilcoxon signed ranks test between stage b and c.
The ΔE (SD) for color changes of group II of pigmented M511 maxillofacial silicone material.
| Control group before immersion | Subgroups after immersion in storage condition | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | c | ||
| Mean ± SD | 14.86 ± 0.23 | 14.19 ± 0.33 | 14.13 ± 0.46 | 14.55 ± 0.81 |
|
| 2.273 (0.132) | |||
| Mean difference ( | ↓0.674(0.293) | ↓0.734 (0.072) | ↓0.31 (1.000) | |
| Mean difference ( | ↓0.06 (1.000) | ↑0.364 (1.000) | ||
| Mean difference ( | ↑0.424 (1.000) | |||
ANOVA with repeated measures test with the adjusted Bonferroni was assessed.
P 1: stands for Bonferroni adjusted P value for comparison between before and each other period.
P 2: stands for Bonferroni adjusted P value for comparison between subgroup a and each other period.
P 3: stands for Bonferroni adjusted P value for comparison stage b and c.
Comparison of surface roughness mean value (Ra) for group III.
| Control group before immersion | Subgroups after immersion in storage condition | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | c | ||
| Mean ± SD | 0.74 ± 0.11 | 2.90 ± 0.44 | 2.51 ± 0.95 | 1.65 ± 0.08 |
|
KW
| 0.001* | |||
|
| 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.009 | |
|
| 0.465 | 0.009 | ||
|
| 0.028 | |||
KW P: P value for Kruskal-Wallis test for comparing between the different studied groups.
P 1: P value for Mann-Whitney test between stage and each other groups.
P 2: P value for Mann-Whitney test between stage Basic and each other groups.
P 3: P value for Mann-Whitney test between Sebum and Control.
#: Significant at P ≤ 0.008 using Bonferroni correction.
Figure 6SEM micrograph showing smooth surface with few scattered fine silica of the control group (2500 and 5000x).
Figure 7SEM micrograph showing rough surface with scattered fine silica particles of subgroup (a) after immersion in acidic solution (2500 and 5000x).
Figure 8SEM micrograph showing smooth surface with some faint scattered vacuoles of subgroup (b) after immersion in alkaline solution (2500 and 5000x).
Figure 9SEM micrograph showing wrinkled wavy surface with some scattered silica particles in subgroup (c) after immersion in sebum solution (2500 and 5000x).