Evaluation of Vickers hardness of different types of acrylic denture base resins with and without glass fibre reinforcement

Objective: To evaluate the Vickers hardness of different acrylic resins for denture bases with and without the addition of glass fibres. Background: It has been suggested that different polymerisation methods, as well as the addition of glass fibre (FV) might improve the hardness of acrylic. Materials and methods: Five types of acrylic resin were tested: Vipi Wave (VW), microwave polymerisation; Vipi Flash (VF), auto-polymerisation; Lucitone (LT), QC20 (QC) and Vipi Cril (VC), conventional heat-polymerisation, all with or without glass fibre reinforcement (GFR) and distributed into 10 groups (n = 12). Specimens were then submitted to Vickers hardness testing with a 25-g load for 30 s. All data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test. Results: A significant statistical difference was observed with regard to the polymerisation method and the GFR (p < 0.05). Without the GFR, the acrylic resin VC presented the highest hardness values, and VF and LT presented the lowest. In the presence of GFR, VC resin still presented the highest Vickers hardness values, and VF and QC presented the lowest. Conclusions: The acrylic resin VC and VW presented higher hardness values than VF and QC resins. Moreover, GFR increased the Vickers hardness of resins VW, VC and LT.

Peel bond strength of resilient liner modified by the addition of antimicrobial agents to denture base acrylic resin

In order to prolong the clinical longevity of resilient denture relining materials and reduce plaque accumulation, incorporation of antimicrobial agents into these materials has been proposed. However, this addition may affect their properties. Objective: This study evaluated the effect of the addition of antimicrobial agents into one soft liner (Soft Confort, Dencril) on its peel bond strength to one denture base (QC 20, Dentsply). Material and Methods: Acrylic specimens (n=9) were made (75x10x3 mm) and stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 48 h. The drug powder concentrations (nystatin 500,000U - G2; nystatin 1,000,000U - G3; miconazole 125 mg - G4; miconazole 250 mg - G5; ketoconazole 100 mg - G6; ketoconazole 200 mg - G7; chlorhexidine diacetate 5% - G8; and 10% chlorhexidine diacetate - G9) were blended with the soft liner powder before the addition of the soft liner liquid. A group (G1) without any drug incorporation was used as control. Specimens (n=9) (75x10x6 mm) were plasticized according to the manufacturers' instructions and stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 h. Relined specimens were then submitted to a 180-degree peel test at a crosshead speed of 10 mm/min. Data (MPa) were analyzed by analysis of variance (alpha=0.05) and the failure modes were visually classified. Results: No significant difference was found among experimental groups (p=0.148). Cohesive failure located within the resilient material was predominantly observed in all tested groups. Conclusions: Peel bond strength between the denture base and the modified soft liner was not affected by the addition of antimicrobial agents.

Antimicrobial Properties and Cytotoxicity of an Antimicrobial Monomer for Application in Prosthodontics

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the antimicrobial properties and cytotoxicity of the monomer methacryloyloxyundecylpyridinium bromide (MUPB), an antiseptic agent capable of copolymerizing with denture base acrylic resins. Materials and Methods: The antimicrobial activity of MUPB was tested against the species Candida albicans, Candida dubliniensis, Candida glabrata, Lactobacillus casei, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus mutans. The minimum inhibitory and fungicidal/bactericidal concentrations (MIC, MFC/MBC) of MUPB were determined by serial dilutions in comparison with cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC). The cytotoxic effects of MUPB at concentrations ranging from 0.01 to 1 g/L were assessed by MTT test on L929 cells and compared with methyl methacrylate (MMA). The antimicrobial activity of copolymerized MUPB was tested by means of acrylic resin specimens containing three concentrations of the monomer (0, 0.3, 0.6% w/w). Activity was quantified by means of a disc diffusion test and a quantification of adhered planktonic cells. Statistical analysis employed the Mann-Whitney test for MIC and MFC/MBC, and ANOVA for the microbial adherence test (a= 0.05). Results: MUBP presented lower MIC values when compared with CPC, although differences were significant for C. dubliniensis and S. mutans only (p= 0.046 and 0.043, respectively). MFC/MBC values were similar for all species except C. albicans; in that case, MUPB presented significantly higher values (p= 0.046). MUPB presented higher cytotoxicity than MMA for all tested concentrations (p < 0.001) except at 0.01 g/L. Irrespective of the concentration incorporated and species, there was no inhibition halo around the specimens. The incorporation of MUPB influenced the adhesion of C. albicans only (p= 0.003), with lower CFU counts for the 0.6% group. Conclusions: It was concluded that non-polymerized MUPB has an antimicrobial capacity close to that of CPC and high cytotoxicity when compared with MMA. The antimicrobial activity of MUPB after incorporation within a denture base acrylic resin did not depend on its elution, but was shown to be restricted to C. albicans.