Surface roughness of high-performance polymers used for fixed implant-supported prostheses

No Thumbnail Available

Date

2021

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Mosby-elsevier

Open Access Color

OpenAIRE Downloads

OpenAIRE Views

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Abstract

Statement of problem. High-performance polymers have been recommended by their manufacturers as a framework material for implant-supported fixed prostheses. However, little is known about the surface roughness of high-performance polymers in different compositions and whether they require layering with a composite resin or acrylic resin on the tissue surface. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the surface roughness of different computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacture (CAD-CAM) high-performance polymers and the effect of polishing on their surface roughness. Material and methods: Seventy high-performance polymer specimens (n=10) for 4 different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) brands (BRE, CP, ZZ, J), 1 polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) (PK), and 2 different fiber-reinforced composite resin (FRC) materials (T, TR) were milled from 7x8x30-mm CAD-CAM blocks. The surface roughness (Ra) of each specimen was measured on the same surfaces after milling (baseline) and after polishing by using a contact profilometer. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA (MIXED procedure) and the Bonferroni corrected t test (alpha=.05) were used to analyze the surface roughness data. Results: No significant differences were found among high-performance polymers when the baseline surface roughness measurements of the materials were compared (P>.05). All materials (BRE, PK, CP, T, TR, ZZ), except for a PEEK material (J) (P<.05), had no significant differences in their surface roughness before and after polishing. After polishing, the surface roughness of the J PEEK material was higher than that of CP, PK, T, and ZZ (P<.05). Conclusions: The surface roughness of high-performance polymers in different compositions after milling was similar. Polishing increased the surface roughness of only one PEEK (J) material. All surface roughness values were above the clinical acceptability threshold of 0.2 mu m.

Description

batak, burcu/0000-0001-5363-5067;

Keywords

[No Keyword Available]

Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL

Fields of Science

Citation

12

WoS Q

Q1

Scopus Q

Q1

Source

Volume

126

Issue

2

Start Page

End Page