Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2022 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 4

Economical and easy methods of smoke stain removal from maxillofacial prostheses

Pages
363–368
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Cleaning process using hand soap and chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash succeed to return the color of stained silicone to the initial color.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Service life of a maxillofacial prosthesis is too short especially because of color instability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Two groups (n=20) were pigmented intrinsically mimicking dark and fair tone skin and one group was not pigmented for control.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Cleaning process using hand soap and chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash succeed to return the color of stained silicone to the initial color.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: Service life of a maxillofacial prosthesis is too short especially because of color instability. This study aimed to investigate the effects of hand soap and chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash on the color of maxillofacial prosthesis after exposure of cigarette smoke. Materials and Methods: Sixty specimens were fabricated from a maxillofacial silicone material. Two groups (n=20) were pigmented intrinsically mimicking dark and fair tone skin and one group was not pigmented for control. All the specimens were exposed to cigarette smoke in a closed apparatus designed for the study. Color measurements of the specimens were performed before and after smoke exposition by using a spectrophotometer. Half of all the specimens (n=30) consisting of dark, fair and non-pigmented ones was rubbed with liquid hand soap and the other half was immersed in chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash (0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate). Color measurement was repeated after cleaning process. Color differences were calculated both CIELab (∆E*ab) and CIEDE2000 (∆E00) color measurement formulas. Results: Color groups had significantly different color change values in terms of ∆E00 and ∆E*ab after exposition to smoke and cleaning methods (p < 0.001). The effect of soap and chlorhexidine on color change values did not differ from each other (p=0.284 for ∆E00, p=0.312 for ∆E*ab). The interaction of color groups with cleaning methods was statistically insignificant (p=0.962 for ∆E00, p=0.550 for ∆E*ab). ∆E00 and ∆E*ab values showing color alteration between initial color and after cleaning were significantly different in groups (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Cleaning process using hand soap and chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash succeed to return the color of stained silicone to the initial color.

🔖

Cite This Article

KURT, M., ÖZYEMİŞÇİ, N. (2022). Economical and easy methods of smoke stain removal from maxillofacial prostheses. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 4, 363–368. https://ajindex.com/articles/445635

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Paravina RD, Powers JM. Esthetic Color Training in Dentistry. 1st ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Mosby. 2004; 96
  2. Taylor TD. Clinical Maxillofacial Prosthetics. Ed. Thomas Dean Taylor. Chicago: Quintessence Pub Co. 2000; 6,146,253
  3. Hooper SM, Westcott TP, Evans LL, Bocca AP, Jagger DC. Implant-supported facial prostheses provided by a maxillofacial unit in a U.K. regional hospital: longevity and patient opinions. J Prosthodont. 2005;14:32-8
  4. Mitra A, Choudhary S, Garg H, HG J. Maxillofacial prosthetic materials-an inclination towards silicones. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8:ZE08–ZE13
  5. Caxias FP, Santos DM, Bannwart LC, Lamartine C, Neto MM, Goiato MC. Classification, History, and Future Prospects of Maxillofacial Prosthesis. Int J Dent. 2019;1-7
  6. Cifter ED, Ozdemir-Karatas M, Cinarli A, Sancakli E, Balik A, Evlioglu G. In vitro study of effects of aging and processing conditions on colour change in maxillofacial silicone elastomers. BMC Oral Health. 2019;19:122
  7. Polyzois GL, Tarantili PA, Frangou MJ, Andreopoulos AG. Physical properties of a silicone prosthetic elastomer stored in simulated skin secretions. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:572-7
  8. Goiato MC, Haddad MF, Santos DM, Pesqueira AA, Moreno A. Hardness evaluation of prosthetic silicones containing opacifiers following chemical disinfection and accelerated aging. Braz Oral Res. 2010;24303-8
  9. Mancuso DN, Goiato MC, Santos DM. Color stability after accelerated aging of two silicones, pigmented or not, for use in facial prostheses. Braz Oral Res. 2009;23:144-8
  10. Mehta S, Nandeeshwar DB. A spectrophotometric analysis of extraoral aging conditions on the color stability of maxillofacial silicone. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2017;17:355-60
  11. Hatamleh MM, Watts DC. Effect of extraoral aging conditions on color stability of maxillofacial silicone elastomer. J Prosthodont. 2010;19:536-43
  12. Griniari P, Polyzois G, Papadopoulos T. Color and structural changes of a maxillofacial elastomer: the effects of accelerated photoaging, disinfection and type of pigments. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2015;13:e87-e91
  13. Eleni PN, Krokida MK, Polyzois GL, Gettleman L. Effect of different disinfecting procedures on the hardness and color stability of two maxillofacial elastomers over time. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013;21:278-83
  14. Nikawa H, Jin C, Hamada T, Makihira S, Polyzois G. Candida albicans growth on thermal cycled materials for maxillofacial prostheses in vitro. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28:415-20