Shear Bond Strength of different resin-based materials Processed on Poly-ether-ether ketone frameworks (IN VITRO STUDY)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Postgrad. Candidate, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University

2 Professor of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry Alexandria University

3 Lecturer of Dental Biomaterials, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Removable partial dentures (RPDs) are fabricated to replace the lost teeth of a partially edentulous individual. The serviceability of an RPD is dependent on the bond strength at the resin–framework interface. The esthetically unacceptable display of metal clasps, the increased weight of the prosthesis, the potential for metallic taste, and allergic reactions to metals led to the introduction of a number of thermoplastic materials in clinical practice such as nylon and acetal resins. An alternative restoration material (poly-ether-etherketone [PEEK]) has been successfully used over the last years. OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the shear bond strength and the effect of aging on bond strength of two different resin based materials to polyether-ether-ketone [PEEK]. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty two PEEK cylinders was prepared. Specimens was randomly assigned into two parallel groups, 26 specimens each according to the resin materials used. The bond strength and aging of resin material to poly-ether-ether-ketone [PEEK] was evaluated. RESULTS: the initial shear bond strength of PMMA to PEEK was significantly higher than that of composite resin to PEEK. However, after aging process the shear bond strength of PMMA to PEEK decreased while that of composite resin to PEEK remained unchanged. There was no significant difference between the shear bond strength of both PMMA and composite resin to PEEK after aging. CONCLUSIONS: PMMA can be used as a veneering material with PEEK with comparable results to traditionally used composite resin. Moreover, owing to the adequate bond strength between PEEK and PMMA, PEEK frameworks could be relined in the traditional method similar to metal frameworks

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials. 2007;28:4845-69.
  2. Dawson P, Blundell D. X-ray data for poly (aryl ether ketones). Polymer. 1980;21:577-8.
  3. Cebe P, Hong S-D. Crystallization behaviour of poly (etherether-ketone). Polymer. 1986;27:1183-92.
  4. Jenkins M, Hay J, Terrill N. Structure evolution in melt crystallised PEEK. Polymer. 2003;44:6781-7.
  5. Kumar S, Anderson DP, Adams WW. Crystallization and morphology of poly (aryl-ether-ether-ketone). Polymer. 1986;27:329-36.
  6. Fratini A, Cross E, Whitaker R, Adams W. Refinement of the structure of PEEK fibre in an orthorhombic unit cell. Polymer. 1986;27:861-5.
  7. Staniland P, Wilde C, Bottino F, Di Pasquale G, Pollicino A, Recca A. Synthesis, characterization and study of the thermal properties of new polyarylene ethers. Polymer. 1992;33:1976-81.
  8. Liao K. Performance characterization and modeling of a composite hip prosthesis. Experimental Techniques. 1994;18:33-8.
  9. Kelsey DJ, Springer GS, Goodman SB. Composite implant for bone replacement. Journal of composite materials. 1997;31:1593-632.
  10. Rosentritt M, Preis V, Behr M, Sereno N, Kolbeck C. Shear bond strength between veneering composite and PEEK after different surface modifications. Clinical oral investigations. 2015;19:739-44.
  11. Egusa H, Ko N, Shimazu T, Yatani H. Suspected association of an allergic reaction with titanium dental implants: a clinical report. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2008;100:344-7.
  12. Andreiotelli M, Wenz HJ, Kohal RJ. Are ceramic implants a viable alternative to titanium implants? A systematic literature review. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2009;20:32-47.
  13. Prochazkova J, Podzimek S, Tomka M, Kucerova H, Mihaljevic M, Hana K, et al. Metal alloys in the oral cavity as a cause of oral discomfort in sensitive patients. Neuro endocrinology letters. 2006;27:53-8.
  14. Steele J, Treasure E, O'sullivan I, Morris J, Murray J. Adult dental health survey 2009: Transformations in British oral health 1968–2009. British dental journal. 2012;213:523-7.
  15. McCord JF, Grey NJ, Winstanley RB, Johnson A. A clinical overview of removable prostheses: Introduction. Dental update. 2002;29:375-81.
  16. Behr M, Zeman F, Passauer T, Koller M, Hahnel S, Buergers R, et al. Clinical performance of cast claspretained removable partial dentures: a retrospective study. International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2012;25.
  17. Fueki K, Ohkubo C, Yatabe M, Arakawa I, Arita M, Ino S, et al. Clinical application of removable partial dentures using thermoplastic resin—Part I: Definition and indication of non-metal clasp dentures. Journal of prosthodontic research. 2014;58:3-10.
  18. Kistler F, Adler S, Kistler S. PEEK-Hochleistungskuns tstoffeimimplantat-prothetischen Workflow. Implantologie J. 2013;7:17-42.
  19. Bilgin MS, Baytaroğlu EN, Erdem A, Dilber E. A review of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture techniques for removable denture fabrication. European journal of dentistry. 2016;10:286.
  20. Piwowarczyk A, Lauer H-C, Sorensen JA. In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2004;92:265-73.
  21. Noiset O, Schneider Y-J, Marchand-Brynaert J. Adhesion and growth of CaCo2 cells on surface-modified PEEK substrata. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition. 2000;11:767-86.
  22. Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I, Polyzois G. The Use of a Modified Poly‐Ether‐Ether‐Ketone (PEEK) as an Alternative Framework Material for Removable Dental Prostheses. A Clinical Report. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2016;25:580-4.
  23. Stawarczyk B, Keul C, Beuer F, Roos M, Schmidlin PR. Tensile bond strength of veneering resins to PEEK: impact of different adhesives. Dental materials journal. 2013;32:441-8.
  24. Taufall S, Eichberger M, Schmidlin PR, Stawarczyk B. Fracture load and failure types of different veneered polyetheretherketone fixed dental prostheses. Clinical oral investigations. 2016;20:2493-500.
  25. Aboushelib MN. Evaluation of zirconia/resin bond strength and interface quality using a new technique. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2011;13:255. 
  26. Kern M, Lehmann F. Influence of surface conditioning on bonding to polyetheretherketon (PEEK). Dental Materials. 2012;28:1280-3.
  27. Chung R, Clark R, Darvell B. The bonding of cold‐cured acrylic resin to acrylic denture teeth. Australian dental journal. 1995;40:241-5.
  28. Baehr N, Keul C, Edelhoff D, Eichberger M, Roos M, Gernet W, et al. Effect of different adhesives combined with two resin composite cements on shear bond strength to polymeric CAD/CAM materials. Dental materials journal. 2013;32:492-501.
  29. Vallittu P, Ruyter I. The swelling phenomenon of acrylic resin polymer teeth at the interface with denture base polymers. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 1997;78:194- 9.
  30. Kanie T, Arikawa H, Fujii K, Ban S. Light-curing reinforcement for denture base resin using a glass fiber cloth pre-impregnated with various urethane oligomers. Dental materials journal. 2004;23:291-6.
  31. Coy HD. Direct resin fillings. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 1953;47:532-7.
  32. Musanje L, Darvell B. Aspects of water sorption from the air, water and artificial saliva in resin composite restorative materials. Dental Materials. 2003;19:414-22.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics