Dergiler / Annals of Medical Research / 2019 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 9

Cytotoxicity of polymethylmethacrylate copolymers

Sayfa
1868–1874
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

It was shown that the copolymer resins formed by the addition of 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% by volume of isobutylmethacrylate,butyl-methacrylate, and ethyl-methacrylate to the methyl-methacrylate were biocompatible materials.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: This study aimed to determine the cytotoxicity of polymethylmethacrylate copolymers.Material and Methods: The polymethylmethacrylate resin was used to fabricate the samples.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Ethyl-methacrylate, butylmethacrylateand isobutyl-methacrylate, were used to form the copolymerization of polymethylmethacrylate. 10%-20%-30%-40%ethyl-methacrylate, butyl-methacrylate and isobutyl-methacrylate monomers were added to the methyl-methacrylate, which is themonomer of the control group, and 13 different groups were formed.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:It was shown that the copolymer resins formed by the addition of 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% by volume of isobutylmethacrylate,butyl-methacrylate, and ethyl-methacrylate to the methyl-methacrylate were biocompatible materials.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to determine the cytotoxicity of polymethylmethacrylate copolymers.Material and Methods: The polymethylmethacrylate resin was used to fabricate the samples. Ethyl-methacrylate, butylmethacrylateand isobutyl-methacrylate, were used to form the copolymerization of polymethylmethacrylate. 10%-20%-30%-40%ethyl-methacrylate, butyl-methacrylate and isobutyl-methacrylate monomers were added to the methyl-methacrylate, which is themonomer of the control group, and 13 different groups were formed. Five specimens (n=5) for cytotoxicity test were prepared foreach group. Cytotoxicity effects of the resins at 24th and 48th hours were evaluated by MTT assay. The data of the cytotoxicity testwas analyzed by applying one-way variance analysis.Results: The effect of monomer type and monomer percent on cell viability was significant in both periods (p< 0.01). The percentageof cell viability of all groups at both times was over 90%. The cell viability showed a tendency to decrease by increasing the percentageof monomer added in both periods. The highest and lowest cell viability in 24th hours were observed in 10% ethyl-methacrylate and30% butyl-methacrylate groups respectively, while the highest and lowest cell viability in a 48th hour was observed in 10% butylmethacrylateand 40% butyl-methacrylate groups, respectively.Conclusion: The cytotoxic effects of copolymer resins were not observed at 24th and 48th hours. Cell viability was found at more than90% in both periods. It was shown that the copolymer resins formed by the addition of 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40% by volume of isobutylmethacrylate,butyl-methacrylate, and ethyl-methacrylate to the methyl-methacrylate were biocompatible materials.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

HAYRAN, Y., YILMAZ, Ş., KESKİN, Y. (2022). Cytotoxicity of polymethylmethacrylate copolymers. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 9, 1868–1874. https://ajindex.com/articles/446774

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Consani RLX, de Paula AB, Fugolin APP, et al. Effect of the combination of a crosslinking agent and a thiourethane additive on the properties of acrylic denture bases processed with microwave energy. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2019;98:90-5
  2. Jagger DC, Harrison A, Jandt KD. The reinforcement of dentures. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:185-94
  3. Praveen B, Babaji HV, Prasanna BG, et al. comparison of impact strength and fracture morphology of different heat cure denture acrylic resins: an in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2014;6:12-6
  4. Cunha TR, Regis RR, Bonatti MR, et al. Influence of incorporation of fluoroalkyl methacrylates on roughness and flexural strength of a denture base acrylic resin. J Appl Oral Sci 2009;17:103-7
  5. Umemoto K, Kurata S, Morishita K, et al. Basic study of a new soft resin applied with bisfunctional siloxane oligomer. Dent Mater J 2007;26:656-8
  6. Sahin O, Ozdemir AK, Turgut M, et al. Investigation of flexural strength and cytotoxicity of acrylic resin copolymers by using different polymerization methods. J Adv Prosthodont 2015;7:98-107
  7. Jagger D, Jagger R, Allen S, et al. An investigation into the transverse and impact strength ofhigh strength’denture base acrylic resins. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:263-7
  8. Phillips R. Chemistry of The Synthetic Resins. In: Dyson J, eds. Science of Dental Materials. 9th Edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders;1991. p.166-8
  9. Arlen M, Dadmun, MD. The reinforcement of polystyrene and poly (methyl methacrylate) interfaces using alternating copolymers. Polymer 2003;44:6883-9
  10. Lyatskaya Y, Balazs AC. Using copolymer mixtures to compatibilize immiscible homopolymer blends. Macromolecules 1996;29:7581-7
  11. Lyatskaya Y, Gersappe, D, Balazs, AC. Effect of copolymer architecture on the efficiency of compatibilizers. Macromolecules 1995;28:6278
  12. Di Lorenzo ML, Frigione M. Compatibilization criteria and procedures for binary blends: a review. J Polym Eng 1997;17:429-59
  13. Moszner N, Fischer UK, Angermann J, et al. Bis-(acrylamide) s as new cross-linkers for resin-based composite restoratives. Dent Mater 2006;22:1157-62
  14. Hayran Y, Keskin Y. Flexural strength of polymethyl methacrylate copolymers as a denture base resin. Dent Mater J 2019;38:678-86
  15. Wong, JY, Bronzino, JD. Biomaterials. In: Wong, JY, Bronzino, JD, eds. Biomedical Engineering Handbook. 1th edition. Boca Raton: CRC Press and IEEE Press;1995. p.530-610
  16. Koutis D, Freeman S. Allergic contact stomatitis caused by acrylic monom