CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2022; 16(03): 521-527
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716598
Original Article

Influence of Different Pigment Incorporation Methods on the Sorption and Solubility of Medical Silicones

Adhara Smith Nobrega
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, São Paulo State University, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil
,
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, São Paulo State University, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil
,
André Pinheiro de Magalhães Bertoz
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, São Paulo State University, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil
,
André Luiz de Melo Moreno
2   Department of Pediatric and Social Dentistry, São Paulo State University, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Marcelo Coelho Goiato
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, São Paulo State University, School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study is to verify the influence of three pigment incorporation methods (conventional, mechanical, and industrial) on the sorption and solubility of the MDX4-4210 and A-2186 silicones.

Materials and Methods The groups formed were based on the silicones used (A-2186 and MDX4-4210), intrinsic pigments (pink, bronze, and black), and pigment incorporation methods (conventional, mechanical, and industrial). The dimensions of all samples were 45-mm diameter (ø) × 1-mm thickness. Readings were taken initially and after 1,008 hours of aging.

Statistical Analysis Three-way analysis of variance and the Tukey's test were performed (α = 0.05).

Results For sorption and solubility, there was no difference between the incorporation methods for the A-2186 silicone, regardless of the pigment used (p > 0.05). For pink MDX4-4210, the industrial and mechanical methods showed higher values of sorption compared with the conventional method (p < 0.05). For bronze MDX4-4210, the industrial method showed a higher sorption value compared with the conventional and mechanical methods (p < 0.05). For black MDX4-4210, there was no difference between incorporation methods based on sorption (p > 0.05). For pink MDX4-4210, the mechanical method showed a higher solubility value compared with the industrial and conventional methods (p < 0.05). For black MDX4-4210 and bronze MDX4-4210, there was no statistically significant difference between incorporation methods based on solubility (p > 0.05).

Conclusion Based on sorption and solubility, for the A-2186 silicone, the conventional, mechanical, and industrial methods of pigment incorporation were equivalent. For the MDX4-4210 silicone, its results of sorption and solubility were varied, and further studies are recommended.



Publication History

Article published online:
01 October 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Cevik P, Yildirim-Bicer AZ. Effect of different types of disinfection solution and aging on the hardness and colour stability of maxillofacial silicone elastomers. Int J Artif Organs 2017; DOI: 10.5301/ijao.5000659.
  • 2 Rai SY, Guttal SS. Effect of intrinsic pigmentation on the tear strength and water sorption of two commercially available silicone elastomers. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2013; 13 (01) 30-35
  • 3 Nobrega AS, Andreotti AM, Moreno A, Sinhoreti MA, Dos Santos DM, Goiato MC. Influence of adding nanoparticles on the hardness, tear strength, and permanent deformation of facial silicone subjected to accelerated aging. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116 (04) 623-629.e1
  • 4 Nobrega AS, Malavazi EM, Melo Neto CLM. et al. Influence of different pigment incorporation methods on color, dimensional stability, and detail reproduction of silicones. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (03) 399-404
  • 5 Goiato MC, Nobrega AS, Freitas da Silva EV. et al. Tear strength analysis of MDX4-4210 and A-2186 silicones with different intrinsic pigments incorporated by mechanical and industrial methods. Int J Dent 2019; 2019: 2573095
  • 6 Mitra A, Choudhary S, Garg H, H. G J. Maxillofacial prosthetic materials- an inclination towards silicones. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8 (12) ZE08-ZE13
  • 7 Lai JH, Wang LL, Ko CC, DeLong RL, Hodges JS. New organosilicon maxillofacial prosthetic materials. Dent Mater 2002; 18 (03) 281-286
  • 8 Hatamleh MM, Watts DC. Porosity and color of maxillofacial silicone elastomer. J Prosthodont 2011; 20 (01) 60-66
  • 9 Malavazi Marrega E, dos Santos DM, de Moraes Melo Neto CL, de Caxias FP, da Silva EVF, Bannwart LC. et al. Influence of Different Pigmentations and Accelerated Aging on the Hardness and Tear Strength of the A-2186 and MDX4-4210 Silicones. Int J Dent 2020; 2020: 8492091
  • 10 Saini R, Kotian R, Madhyastha P, Srikant N. Comparative study of sorption and solubility of heat-cure and self-cure acrylic resins in different solutions. Indian J Dent Res 2016; 27 (03) 288-294
  • 11 Hulterström AK, Berglund A, Ruyter IE. Wettability, water sorption and water solubility of seven silicone elastomers used for maxillofacial prostheses. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2008; 19 (01) 225-231
  • 12 Braden M, Wright PS. Water absorption and water solubility of soft lining materials for acrylic dentures. J Dent Res 1983; 62 (06) 764-768
  • 13 Garg A, Shenoy KK. A comparative evaluation of effect on water sorption and solubility of a temporary soft denture liner material when stored either in distilled water, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite or artificial saliva: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016; 16 (01) 53-62
  • 14 Scherillo G, Petretta M, Galizia M, La Manna P, Musto P, Mensitieri G. Thermodynamics of water sorption in high performance glassy thermoplastic polymers. Front Chem 2014; 2: 25
  • 15 Polat TN, Karacaer O, Tezvergil A, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. Water sorption, solubility and dimensional changes of denture base polymers reinforced with short glass fibers. J Biomater Appl 2003; 17 (04) 321-335
  • 16 Arima T, Murata H, Hamada T. The effects of cross-linking agents on the water sorption and solubility characteristics of denture base resin. J Oral Rehabil 1996; 23 (07) 476-480
  • 17 Goiato MC, Silva EVFD, Medeiros RA. et al. Effect of nonthermal plasma on the properties of a resinous liner submitted to aging. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 119 (03) 397-403
  • 18 Council on Dental Materials and Devices Revised American Dental Association specification no. 12 for denture base polymers. J Am Dent Assoc 1975; 90 (02) 451-458
  • 19 ASTM G53–96, Practice for Operating Light- and Water-Exposure Apparatus (Fluorescent UV-Condensation Type) for Exposure of Nonmetallic Materials (Withdrawn 2000), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 1996. Accessed August 5, 2020 at: https://www.astm.org/DATABASE.CART/WITHDRAWN/G53.htm
  • 20 Garcia-Fierro JL, Aleman JV. Sorption of water by epoxide prepolymers. Macromolecules 1982; 15: 1145-1149
  • 21 Tetteh S, Bibb RJ, Martin SJ. Mechanical and morphological effect of plant based antimicrobial solutions on maxillofacial silicone elastomer. Materials (Basel) 2018; 11 (06) 925
  • 22 Lai JH, Hodges JS. Effects of processing parameters on physical properties of the silicone maxillofacial prosthetic materials. Dent Mater 1999; 15 (06) 450-455