Os elásticos ortodônticos intermaxilares sintéticos vem sendo cada vez mais utilizados, sendo principalmente indicados para pacientes que apresentam hiper-sensibilidade ao látex. Afim de avaliar e comparar o comportamento de elásticos de látex e sintéticos quanto a perda de força ao longo do tempo, este estudo foi realizado tanto in vitro quanto in vivo. Para o estudo in vitro foram avaliados 15 elásticos de cada material, para cada tempo: 0, 1, 3, 12 e 24 horas. No estudo in vivo, pacientes foram avaliados (N=15), utilizando elásticos de ambos os materiais (látex e sintético), nos mesmos tempos do estudo in vitro. Os elásticos foram transferidos para a máquina de ensaios mecânicos (EMIC DL-500 MF). Os valores da força gerada foram registrados após a distensão dos elásticos a uma distância de 25mm. Foi aplicado o teste t pareado para a amostra clínica e independente para a amostra laboratorial. Foi utilizada a análise de variância (ANOVA) para verificar a variação das forças geradas entre os tempos determinados e o teste post-hoc para identificar entre quais tempos houve diferença significativa. Quanto às forças iniciais geradas (zero hora), os valores para os elásticos sintéticos foram bastante semelhantes entre os estudos laboratorial e clínico e ligeiramente superiores aos dos elásticos de látex. Nos tempos subsequentes, as forças geradas pelos elásticos de látex apresentaram valores superiores. Em relação à degradação do material, ao final de 24 horas, maior percentual foi observado para os elásticos sintéticos, tanto in vitro quanto in vivo. A maior queda nos valores das forças liberadas pelos elásticos de ambos os materiais e nos estudos clínico e laboratorial, ocorreu entre os tempos de 0 e 1 hora, seguida de uma queda gradativa e progressiva até o tempo de 24 horas. Os elásticos de látex apresentaram um comportamento mais estável no período estudado em relação aos sintéticos, em ambos os estudos.

O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a estabilidade dimensional das siliconas de condensação pesada e leve para moldagem odontológica, quando imersas em solução desinfetante por 10 e 20 minutos, relacionando a importância da biossegurança no manuseio destes materiais. Os materiais de moldagem testados foram: Optosil Confort e Xantopren VL Plus; e as soluções desinfetantes foram o hipoclorito de sódio a 1% (Solução de Milton) e o glutaraldeído a 2% (Glutaron II). Impressões foram obtidas através de moldeiras perfuradas de aço inoxidável, de acordo com a especificação n.º 19 da ADA, perfazendo um total de 50 moldagens, que foram executadas pela técnica em passo único. Para assegurar a completa polimerização o material foi removido após 7 minutos e submetido à imersão nas soluções desinfetantes nos tempos determinados, sendo um grupo controle representado por moldes sem imersão. Depois de removidos das soluções, os corpos de prova foram lavados em água corrente por 15 segundos, secos e medidos 3 vezes cada para registro da média, usando um microscópio óptico, com precisão de 0,001 mm. A análise de variância a dois critérios, com nível de significância de 5%, mostrou que as diferenças nas dimensões lineares da silicona testada não são estatisticamente significantes (p>;0,05) após sua imersão em solução de hipoclorito de sódio a 1% e glutaraldeído a 2% até 20 minutos. Os resultados indicaram que as soluções testadas podem ser seguramente empregadas na desinfecção de siliconas de adição durante os procedimentos clínicos de reabilitação protética.

In the present study, two types of tests (tensile strength test and polymerization inhibition test) were performed to evaluate the physical and chemical properties of four impression materials [a polysulfide (Permlastic), a polyether (Impregum), a condensation silicone (Xantopren) and a polyvinylsiloxane (Aquasil)&#9,3; when polymerized in contact with of one conventional (Hemostop) and two experimental (Vislin and Afrin) gingival retraction solutions. For the tensile strength test, the impression materials were mixed and packed into a steel plate with perforations that had residues of the gingival retraction solutions. After polymerization, the specimens were tested in tensile strength in a universal testing machine. For the polymerization inhibition test, specimens were obtained after taking impressions from a matrix with perforations that contained 1 drop of the gingival retraction solutions. Two independent examiners decided on whether or not impression material remnants remained unpolymerized, indicating interference of the chemical solutions. Based on the analysis of the results of both tests, the following conclusions were reached: 1. The tensile strength of the polysulfide decreased after contact with Hemostop and Afrin. 2. None of the chemical solutions inhibited the polymerization of the polysulfide; 3. The polyether presented lower tensile strength after polymerization in contact with the three gingival retraction agents; 4. The polyether had its polymerization inhibited only by Hemostop; 5. None of the chemical solutions affected the tensile strength of the condensation silicone; 6. Only Hemostop inhibited the polymerization of the condensation silicone; 7. The polyvinylsiloxane specimens polymerized in contact with Hemostop had significantly lower tensile strength; 8. Neither of the chemical solutions (Afrin and Vislin) affected the tensile strength of the polyvinylsiloxane and the condensation silicone; 9. Results of the tensile strength and polymerization inhibition tests suggest that Vislin can be used as substance of gingival retraction without affecting the tested properties of four impression materials.

The development of implant dentistry improved the possibilities of rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis. However, clinically it is difficult to bond the silicone to the attachment system. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive system on the bond strength between acrylic resin and facial silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 samples were fabricated with auto-polymerized acrylic resin and MDX 4-4210 facial silicone. Both materials were bonded through mechanical retentions and/or application of primers (DC 1205 primer and Sofreliner primer S) and adhesive (Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A) or not (control group). Samples were divided into 12 groups according to the method used to attach the silicone to the acrylic resin. All samples were subjected to a T-peel test in a universal testing machine. Failures were classified as adhesive, cohesive or mixed. The data were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS: The highest bond strength values (5.95 N/mm; 3.07 N/mm; 4.75 N/mm) were recorded for the samples that received a Sofreliner primer application. These values were significantly higher when the samples had no scratches and did not receive the application of Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A. CONCLUSIONS: The most common type of failure was adhesive. The use of Sofreliner primer increased the bond strength between the auto-polymerized acrylic resin and the Silastic MDX 4-4210 facial silicone.

Aim This study aimed to evaluate the effect of frozen storage on the physical properties of a silicone-based test food material, highly used to evaluate the masticatory performance in research settings. Methods A total of 1,666 silicone cubes of Optosil Comfort® with 5.6-mm edges were shaped and stored at -18°C. The cubes were subsequently tested for flexural strength (maximum force, displacement, stress, and strain) before breaking (n = 136), changes in weight and size (n = 170), and masticatory performance (n = 1360) at eight timepoints: immediately after cube preparation (baseline, no freezing), and 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks, and 2, 4 and 6 months after frozen storage. The cubes were thawed 8 h before each assessment. Results The maximum force, stress, maximum displacement, and deformation values for the cubes were not affected by freezing (P > 0.05). At all of the time points, the cubes exhibited similar weight (P = 0.366) and size (identical values). The masticatory performance for the cubes also showed no differences from baseline through 6 months (P = 0.061). Conclusion Freezing Optosil Comfort® silicone cubes did not alter the physical and mechanical properties of the material, being suitable to optimize the assessment of masticatory parameters for research purposes.

The development of implant dentistry improved the possibilities of rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis. However, clinically it is difficult to bond the silicone to the attachment system. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive system on the bond strength between acrylic resin and facial silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 samples were fabricated with auto-polymerized acrylic resin and MDX 4-4210 facial silicone. Both materials were bonded through mechanical retentions and/or application of primers (DC 1205 primer and Sofreliner primer S) and adhesive (Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A) or not (control group). Samples were divided into 12 groups according to the method used to attach the silicone to the acrylic resin. All samples were subjected to a T-peel test in a universal testing machine. Failures were classified as adhesive, cohesive or mixed. The data were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS: The highest bond strength values (5.95 N/mm; 3.07 N/mm; 4.75 N/mm) were recorded for the samples that received a Sofreliner primer application. These values were significantly higher when the samples had no scratches and did not receive the application of Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A. CONCLUSIONS: The most common type of failure was adhesive. The use of Sofreliner primer increased the bond strength between the auto-polymerized acrylic resin and the Silastic MDX 4-4210 facial silicone.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dimensional stability of heavy and light bodied condensation silicones after immersion in disinfectant solution for 10 or 20 minutes. The impression materials were Optosil Comfort and Xantopren VL Plus and the disinfectant solutions were 1% sodium hypochlorite and 2% glutaraldehyde. Impressions were made on a perforated stainless steel tray, according to the American Dental Association specification No. 19, adding up to a total of 50 samples. The double mixing method (one time, two viscosities) was used. Impressions were removed from the roulette block after 7 minutes to ensure complete curing and then immersed in the solutions. Impressions not submitted to treatment composed the control group. After these steps, the impressions were removed from the solution, rinsed in running water and air-dried. Three-dimensional measurements were calculated using an optic microscope graduated at 0.001 mm. The two-way ANOVA indicated no differences (p>0.05) for any combination between variables. The results showed that the solution studied can be safely used to disinfect condensation silicone in clinical prosthodontic procedures.

In the present study, two types of tests (tensile strength test and polymerization inhibition test) were performed to evaluate the physical and chemical properties of four impression materials [a polysulfide (Permlastic), a polyether (Impregum), a condensation silicone (Xantopren) and a polyvinylsiloxane (Aquasil)&#9,3; when polymerized in contact with of one conventional (Hemostop) and two experimental (Vislin and Afrin) gingival retraction solutions. For the tensile strength test, the impression materials were mixed and packed into a steel plate with perforations that had residues of the gingival retraction solutions. After polymerization, the specimens were tested in tensile strength in a universal testing machine. For the polymerization inhibition test, specimens were obtained after taking impressions from a matrix with perforations that contained 1 drop of the gingival retraction solutions. Two independent examiners decided on whether or not impression material remnants remained unpolymerized, indicating interference of the chemical solutions. Based on the analysis of the results of both tests, the following conclusions were reached: 1. The tensile strength of the polysulfide decreased after contact with Hemostop and Afrin. 2. None of the chemical solutions inhibited the polymerization of the polysulfide; 3. The polyether presented lower tensile strength after polymerization in contact with the three gingival retraction agents; 4. The polyether had its polymerization inhibited only by Hemostop; 5. None of the chemical solutions affected the tensile strength of the condensation silicone; 6. Only Hemostop inhibited the polymerization of the condensation silicone; 7. The polyvinylsiloxane specimens polymerized in contact with Hemostop had significantly lower tensile strength; 8. Neither of the chemical solutions (Afrin and Vislin) affected the tensile strength of the polyvinylsiloxane and the condensation silicone; 9. Results of the tensile strength and polymerization inhibition tests suggest that Vislin can be used as substance of gingival retraction without affecting the tested properties of four impression materials.

One of the greatest challenges faced by buccomaxillofacial prosthetists is to reproduce the patient's exact skin color and provide adequate esthetics. To reach this objective, professionals must use materials with easy characterization and that maintain color over long periods of time. The objective of this study was, thus, to evaluate the color stability of two types of silicones, Silastic 732 and Silastic MDX4-4210. Twenty-four test specimens were made from each type of silicone and were divided into a colorless group and groups intrinsically pigmented with ceramics, cosmetics or iron oxide. The specimens were submitted to an accelerated system of aging for non-metallic materials. Readings were carried out initially and after periods corresponding to 163, 351, 692 and 1,000 hours of aging, using a reflection spectrophotometer analysis, and color alterations were calculated by the CIE L*a*b* system. The data were submitted to variance analysis and Tukey's test at a 5% level of probability. The results demonstrated that, irrespective of the period of time analyzed, all the materials underwent some type of chromatic alteration (ΔE > 0). The test specimens made with Silastic 732 and MDX4-4210, without pigmentation, presented the lowest color alteration values after 1,000 hours of aging. Of the pigments, ceramic presented the lowest color alteration values and cosmetic powder presented the highest values. Thus, it may be concluded that the materials without the incorporation of pigments presented similar color alteration values, and did not differ statistically. The cosmetic powder used in this study was the pigment that most altered the color of the test specimens.