Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Dent Res J (Isfahan) ; 19: 93, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36605151

ABSTRACT

It may not be possible to treat large maxillofacial defects by surgical reconstruction alone. Prosthetic rehabilitation is invariably required to restore esthetics and function. Achieving adequate retention, stability, and support in these maxillofacial prostheses is a challenging task. This clinical report describes prosthetic rehabilitation of a midfacial defect following surgical resection of squamous cell carcinoma. The intraoral defect was restored with a maxillary obturator prosthesis with salivary reservoir, and the extraoral defect was restored with magnet-retained facial prosthesis having an acrylic resin framework and an overlying silicone facial prosthesis.

2.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc ; 21(3): 287-294, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34380817

ABSTRACT

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the peel bond strength of an autopolymerizing acrylic resin and a fiberreinforced composite (FRC) resin to a heat temperature vulcanizing maxillofacial silicone (M511) using two different primers. Settings and Design: In vitro - comparative study. Materials and Methods: Autopolymerizing acrylic resin and FRC resin specimens with a dimension of 75 mm (length) ×10 mm (width) × 3 mm (height) were fabricated. A total of 60 samples were split into six categories based on the substructure material and primers (A330G primer and Sofreliner tough primer) used to bond the maxillofacial silicone to the FRC and acrylic resin specimens. In a universal testing machine, the peel bond strength was conducted at a 10 mm/min crosshead speed until bonding failure occurred. Statistical Analysis Used: The t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and the Tukey's honest significant difference (post hoc test) tests were used to statistically assess the values. Results: The Sofreliner tough primer produced the greatest peel bond strength in both the acrylic resin (0.89690 N/mm) and the FRC resin groups (3.19860 N/mm). Adhesive failures predominated in the acrylic resin group regardless of the primer used. The FRC group showed predominantly cohesive failures with both the A330G primer and Sofreliner tough primer. Conclusion: This study suggests that FRC resin combined with Sofreliner tough primer can significantly enhance the peel bond strength.


Subject(s)
Acrylic Resins , Maxillofacial Prosthesis , Composite Resins , Materials Testing , Silicones , Tensile Strength
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL