Son zamanlarda kullanılmaya başlanan bir maksillofasiyal silikon elastomerin yaşlanma sonrası yüzey özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi

Year 2026, Volume: 13 Issue: 1 , 52 - 55 , 27.04.2026

Nuran Özyemişci , Meral Kurt , Seçil Karakoca Nemli , Gülay Uzun

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1682997

https://izlik.org/JA92WG42MH

Abstract

Amaç: Silikon elastomer, maksillofasiyal protez yapımnda en çok kullanılan malzemedir. Silikonun bazı avantajları olmasına rağmen materyalin bozunması hala bir problemdir. Son zamanlarda kullanılan materyallerin özelliklerinin araştırılması, hekimlerin olası malzeme seçeneklerini genişletmeleri için önemlidir. Bu özelliklerden bir tanesi mikrobiyolojik kolonizasyon, renk değişimi ve bozunmanın hızlanmasına neden olan yüzey pürüzlülüğüdür (Ra). Bu çalışma, yakın zamanda tanıtılmış yüksek yoğunluklu elastomerlerin suni yaşlandırma sonrası yüzey pürüzlülüğünü değerlendirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Dört adet farklı sertlik seçeneklerine sahip yüksek yoğunluklu silikon (HCS) ve 1 adet sıkça kullanılan sıvı silikon kullanılarak toplam 150 adet örnek üretildi. Her silikon grubu 2 adet renkli alt gruba ve kontrol grubu olarak renksiz bir alt gruba sahipti. Suni yaşlandırma öncesi ve sonrasında profilometre ile örneklerin Ra değerleri ölçüldü. Tüm silikon gruplarında yaşlandırma sonrası Ra değişimleri Wilcoxon signed-rank testi kullanılarak karşılaştırıldı (α=.05).
Bulgular: En düşük sertlik seçeneğine sahip HCS silikon dışında tüm temel silikon gruplarında yaşlandırma öncesi ve sonrası arasında belirgin farklılık bulunmadı (P<05). Yaşlandırma sonrası temel silikon grupları arasında Ra değişimi belirgin olarak farklıydı (P =.001).
Sonuçlar: Çalışmada test edilen HCS silikon, sık olarak kullanılan sıvı silikon ile yaşlandırma sonrası benzer yüzey pürüzlülüğüne sahipti.
Anahtar kelimeler: silikon elastomerler, yüzey özellikleri, maksillofasial protez, yaşlandırma

Keywords

silikon elastomerler , yüzey özellikleri , maksillofasial protez , yaşlandırma

Evaluation of surface properties of a recently introduced maxillofacial silicone elastomer after aging

https://izlik.org/JA92WG42MH

Abstract

Background: Silicone elastomer has been the most widely used material in the production of maxillofacial prostheses. Although silicone has some advantages, the degradation of the material over time is still a problem. Investigating the properties of recently used materials is crucial for practitioners to expand the possible choice of materials. One of these properties is surface roughness (Ra), which causes microbiological colonization, color instability, and accelerated degradation. This study aimed to evaluate Ra after artificial aging of newly introduced high-consistency elastomers.
Materials and Methods: A total of 150 specimens were fabricated using 4 high-consistency silicones (HCS) having different hardness options and 1 commonly used liquid silicone rubber. Each silicone group consisted of 2 colored subgroups and a nonpigmented subgroup as a control group. Ra values of the specimens were measured by a profilometer before and after the artificial aging. Ra change after aging was compared between all silicone groups using Wilcoxon signed-rank test (α=.05).
Results: There was no significant difference between pre- and post-aging Ra values for all main silicone groups except for the lowest hardness option of HCS silicone (P<05). Ra change after aging was significantly different between the main silicone groups (P =.001).
Conclusions: The HCS silicone tested in the study had similar surface roughness with the commonly used liquid silicone rubber after artificial aging.
Keywords: silicone elastomers, surface properties, maxillofacial prosthesis, aging

Keywords

silicone elastomers , surface properties , maxillofacial prosthesis , aging

References

• 1. Hatamleh MM, Polyzois GL, Nuseir A, Hatamleh K, Alnazzawi A. Mechanical Properties and Simulated Aging of Silicone Maxillofacial Elastomers: Advancements in the Past 45 Years. J Prosthodont. 2016;25(5):418-426.
• 2. Dings JPJ, Merkx MAW, de Clonie Maclennan-Naphausen MTP, van de Pol P, Maal TJJ, Meijer GJ. Maxillofacial Prosthetic Rehabilitation: A Survey on the Quality of Life. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(5):780–786.
• 3. Hatamleh MM, Watts DC. Effect of extraoral aging conditions on color stability of maxillofacial silicone elastomer. J Prosthodont. 2010;19(7):536-543.
• 4. Abdalqadir M, Saeed Z, Azhdar B. Surface roughness of pigmented and non-pigmented maxillofacial silicone elastomer before and after artificial aging. Mater Res Express. 2024;11(1):1-10.
• 5. 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(5):572–577.
• 6. 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;24(3):303-308.
• 7. Lou W, Xie C, Guan X. Understanding radiation-thermal aging of polydimethylsiloxane rubber through molecular dynamics simulation. npj Mater Degrad. 2022;84(6):1-10.
• 8. Yousif E, Haddad R. Photodegradation and photostabilization of polymers, especially polystyrene: review. Springerplus. 2013;2:398.
• 9. Al-Kadi FK, Adbulkareem JF, Azhdar BA. Evaluation of the Mechanical and Physical Properties of Maxillofacial Silicone Type A-2186 Impregnated with a Hybrid Chitosan–TiO2 Nanocomposite Subjected to Different Accelerated Aging Conditions. Biomimetics. 2023;8(7):539.
• 10. Mousa MA. Influence of Weather on Hardness and Surface Roughness of Maxillofacial Elastomeric Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020;21(6):678-682.
• 11. Shihab NM, Abdul-Ameer FM. Studying some mechanical properties of maxillofacial silicone elastomer before and after incorporation of intrinsic pigments and artificial aging. Futur Dent J. 2018;4(2):244-252.
• 12. Annamma LM, Hattori M, Ali IE, Dsouza J, Waqar A, Chugh A, et al. Frequently used extraoral maxillofacial prosthetic materials and their longevity - A comprehensive review. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2024;60:137-147.
• 13. Goyal A, Goel H. Prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient with finger amputation using silicone material. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2015;39(4):333-337.
• 14. Raghu KM, Gururaju CR, Sundaresh KJ, Mallikarjuna R. Aesthetic finger prosthesis with silicone biomaterial. BMJ Case Rep. 2013;2013:bcr2013010385.
• 15. Kulkarni J, Curran B, Ebdon-Parry M, Harrison D. Total contact silicone partial foot prostheses for partial foot amputations. The Foot 1995;5(1):32-35.
• 16. İnal CB, Bankoğlu Güngör M, Bağkur M, Karakoca Nemli S. Evaluation of Color Change and Hardness of Different Maxillofacial Silicone Elastomers after Natural Daylight Aging. GUHES. 2021;3(2):59-69.
• 17. Özyemişci N. The Effect of Coloring Agent on the Hardness of Maxillofacial Prosthesis. Health Academy Kastamonu 2022;7(1): 1-8. Turkish
• 18. Atay A, Piskin B, Akin H, Sipahi C, Karakas A, Saracli MA. Evaluation of Candida albicans adherence on the surface of various maxillofacial silicone materials. J Mycol Med. 2013;23(1):27-32.
• 19. Abdalqadir M, Saeed Z, Azhdar B. Surface roughness of pigmented and non-pigmented maxillofacial silicone elastomer before and after artificial aging. Mater Res Express. 2024;11(1):1-10.
• 20. Rahman AM, Jamayet NB, Nizami MMUI, Johari Y, Husein A, Alam MK. Effect of tropical outdoor weathering on the surface roughness and mechanical properties of maxillofacial silicones. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;127(6):937-942.
• 21. Abdullah HA, Abdul-Ameer FM. Evaluation of some mechanical properties of a new silicone elastomer for maxillofacial prostheses after addition of intrinsic pigments. Saudi Dent J. 2018;30(4):330-336.
• 22. Marshall GM. The Oral Environment. In: Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM, eds. Craig’s Restorative Dental Materials. 13th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2012:19.
• 23. Amin M, Akbar M, Amin S. Hydrophobicity of silicone rubber used for outdoor insulation (an overview). Rev Adv Mater Sci. 2007;16: 10-26.
• 24. El Afandy H, Fawzy A. Evaluation of mechanical properties of maxillofacial silicone after long term exposure to different conditions. Egypt Dent J. 2019;65(3):2681-2689.