Polymethyl Methacrylate v.s Cayanoacrylate for Denture Teeth Rebonding | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 40, Volume 65, Issue 3 - July (Fixed Prosthodontics, Dental Materials, Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics), July 2019, Page 2831-2835 PDF (617.18 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2019.72679 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Bassem Mohsen1; Shereen Hashem2 | ||||
| 1Lecturer of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine Future University in Egypt | ||||
| 2Lecturer of Dental Material, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine Future University in Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Debonded/detached denture teeth is a very common cause for denture failures. Chairside repairs using Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) is a technique sensitive and difficult procedure. An alternative adhesive that was quickly recognized was the Cyanoacrylate (CA). CA are solvent free adhesives that cure rapidly when pressed into a thin film between two surfaces. Apart from that, they have clinical applications in medicine, especially as tissue adhesives and sealing materials. Materials and methods: Specimens consisted of acrylic teeth bonded to acrylic denture base. The specimens were divided into two groups; group I for testing bond strength using PMMA and group II for testing bond strength using CA. Results: The lowest mean MPa was seen in group 2 and the difference in MPa between this group and group 1 was significant. Conclusion: Even though CA appears to be the easier option, its` bond strength for teeth rebonding to denture base is less than that of PMMA. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Polymethylmethacrylate, Cyanoacrylate, denture teeth, debonding Abbreviations: Polymethylmethacrylate: PMMA; Cyanoacrylate: CA; Megapascal: MPa; Ridge-lap surface area: RLSA | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 142 PDF Download: 278 |
||||
