Evaluation of two different reinforcing materials used with silicone auricular prostheses

El-Fattah, M.Y. Abd; Rashad, Hoda Mohammed Amin; Kashef, Nahed Ahmed; Ebiary, M.A. El

doi:10.1016/j.tdj.2013.08.001

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common cause of epitheses re-production are color change (71%) [3] and thin margins destruction or its permanent deformation (curling) and silicone delamination [10][11][12][13]. The choice of manufacturing technology of stiffening insert in presented work was dictated by the results of research in the work [11] that reveal that polyurethane insert improves the tensile strength from 7.80 (±0.19) MPa to 15.55 (±0.31) MPa and tear strength from 1.21 (±0.09) MPa to 1.92 (±0.11) MPa, as also provides better marginal integrity and durability of prostheses.…”

Section: Description Of Achieved Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stiffening insert of epithesis was made by thermoforming of polyurethane sheet of 0.1 mm thick (Biolon 0.1, Dreve). After placing split form in the thermoforming machine (Drufosmart, Dreve) the polyurethane plate was heated by infrared in 1 minute and 10 seconds [11]. When softening, temperature was achieved, plasticized polymer sheet was stretched onto the split form by manually lowering the holding frame and underpressure was applied.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CAD/CAM silicone auricular prosthesis with thermoformed stiffening insert

Żmudzki

Burzyński

Chladek

et al. 2017

Archives of Materials Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Epitheses (facial prostheses) for large facial tissue defects manufacturedfrom silicones exhibit unsatisfactory rigidity and its stiffening is required, which createstechnological problems. Moreover, facial epitheses have to be replaced in a relatively shortperiod of use which creates a significant costs, often impossible to realize. The hypothesisof the study was that with use of additive manufacturing is possible to obtain the reusableform for thermoforming of the stiffening insert of auricular prosthesis and the mould whichallows multiple casting of silicone prosthesis with the insert.Design/methodology/approach: Manufacturing of the epithesis consisted of designingand manufacturing. In the first step, the auricular prosthesis and the stiffening insert weredesigned with use of engineering CAD software. In this first computer step, the split form forvacuum thermoforming of the stiffening insert and the split mould for casting of the siliconeear were designed. In the second step, additive printing was used for manufacturing thesplit and reusable model for vacuum thermoforming of the stiffening insert and the splitform of ear. In the third step, stiffening insert was made of thermoformed polyurethane sheetof 0.1 mm thick (Biolon, Dreve), where dental thermoforming machine (Drufosmart, Dreve)was used. In the fourth step, the stiffening insert was located in the mould and the ear wascasting of silicone.Findings: CAD/CAM of epitheses with stiffening insert for large tissues defect/loss wasproposed, where in case of re-producing, it required only thermoforming of insert andcasting silicone with use of the reusable models. Dental technician, in case of damage orloss of a forms, is not much involved in their creation.Research limitations/implications: Bond strength test between stiffening insert vs. softsilicone and manufacturing tolerance of epitheses have not been investigated.Practical implications: Method of casting in a negative form, despite the more timeconsumingwhen comparing with epithesis direct-printing, allows introducing a stiffeninginsert and performing a manual adjustment of margin shape and thickness. Method ofnegative form allows the use of a commercially available medical silicone without the needfor medical tests of a new printed materials.

show abstract

Section: Description Of Achieved Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CAD/CAM silicone auricular prosthesis with thermoformed stiffening insert

Żmudzki

Burzyński

Chladek

et al. 2017

Archives of Materials Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1987, Udagama (Udagama, 1987) studied the use of an aromatic polyether polyurethane film (Factor II, Inc.) 1 to line silicone facial prostheses by preparing the silicone with Medical Adhesive Type A (Dow Corning Company) and the polyurethane sheet with S-2260 primer (Dow Corning Company) (Udagama, 1987;Deng et al, 2004;Kiat-amnuay et al, 2008;Chang et al, 2009;Patil et al, 2010;Shrivastava et al, 2015). The addition of the polyurethane liner improves the tear resistance of the thin regions of the silicone prosthesis, seals the silicone from absorbing oil, allows the use of waterbased skin adhesives, increases surface smoothness thereby increasing comfort and ease of cleaning, and limiting microbial growth (Grant et al, 2001;Deng et al, 2004;Kiat-amnuay et al, 2008;Chang et al, 2009;Abd El-Fattah et al, 2013;Aggarwal et al, 2016). However, the methods of lining a silicone prosthesis with polyurethane methods have been described as lengthy and sophisticated (Abd El-Fattah et al, 2013) and Medical Adhesive Type A (Dow Corning Company) is known to produce acetic acid (an irritant) as it cures (Chang et al, 2009).…”

Section: Chemistry Of Polyurethane and Fabrication In Prostheticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The addition of the polyurethane liner improves the tear resistance of the thin regions of the silicone prosthesis, seals the silicone from absorbing oil, allows the use of waterbased skin adhesives, increases surface smoothness thereby increasing comfort and ease of cleaning, and limiting microbial growth (Grant et al, 2001;Deng et al, 2004;Kiat-amnuay et al, 2008;Chang et al, 2009;Abd El-Fattah et al, 2013;Aggarwal et al, 2016). However, the methods of lining a silicone prosthesis with polyurethane methods have been described as lengthy and sophisticated (Abd El-Fattah et al, 2013) and Medical Adhesive Type A (Dow Corning Company) is known to produce acetic acid (an irritant) as it cures (Chang et al, 2009). In 1992, 8.0% of 88 respondents to a survey of American prosthetists (Andres et al, 1992) used this technique to line prostheses.…”

Section: Chemistry Of Polyurethane and Fabrication In Prostheticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancements in Soft-Tissue Prosthetics Part B: The Chemistry of Imitating Life

Cruz

Ross

Powell

et al. 2020

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Each year, congenital defects, trauma or cancer often results in considerable physical disfigurement for many people worldwide. This adversely impacts their psychological, social and economic outlook, leading to poor life experiences and negative health outcomes. In many cases of soft tissue disfigurement, highly personalized prostheses are available to restore both aesthetics and function. As discussed in part A of this review, key to the success of any soft tissue prosthetic is the fundamental properties of the materials. This determines the maximum attainable level of aesthetics, attachment mechanisms, fabrication complexity, cost, and robustness. Since the earlymid 20th century, polymers have completely replaced natural materials in prosthetics, with advances in both material properties and fabrication techniques leading to significantly improved capabilities. In part A, we discussed the history of polymers in prosthetics, their ideal properties, and the application of polymers in prostheses for the ear, nose, eye, breast and finger. We also reviewed the latest developments in advanced manufacturing and 3D printing, including different fabrication technologies and new and upcoming materials. In this review, Part B, we detail the chemistry of the most commonly used synthetic polymers in soft tissue prosthetics; silicone, acrylic resin, vinyl polymer, and polyurethane elastomer. For each polymer, we briefly discuss their history before detailing their chemistry and fabrication processes. We also discuss degradation of the polymer in the context of their application in prosthetics, including time and weathering, the impact of skin secretions, microbial growth and cleaning and disinfecting. Although advanced manufacturing promises new fabrication capabilities using exotic synthetic polymers with programmable material properties, silicones and acrylics remain the most commonly used materials in prosthetics today. As research in this field progresses, development of new variations and fabrication techniques based on these synthetic polymers will lead to even better and more robust soft tissue prosthetics, with improved lifelike aesthetics and lower cost manufacturing.

show abstract

“…This hybrid endues them a lot of excellent properties such as super flexibility, hydrophobicity, low surface energy, oxidative and thermal stability and weathering‐resistance . Resulting from their special surface properties, polysiloxanes could control the surface structure of polymer materials, which is an essential requirement for many applications particularly in biomedicine and coatings . Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) has been used as the soft segment in the preparation of silicone‐modified polyurethane to balance the rigid segment .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis and characterization of phenyl polysiloxane modified polyurea/polyurethanes

Xie

et al. 2015

J. Polym. Sci. Part A: Polym. Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of phenyl polysiloxane-modified polyurea/ polyurethanes (SPUs) with different silicone loadings (10,20,30, and 40 wt %) have been designed and synthesized. The structures of SPUs were confirmed by 1 H NMR, 13C NMR, and FT-IR. The impact of phenyl polysiloxane content on the properties of SPUs was fully studied. The residual methoxy groups on silicon could help SPUs form interpenetrating networks accompanying with the residual isocyanate under moisture, which was different with the conventional moisturecrosslinking polyurethane system. The properties of SPUs films have been fully researched by attenuated total reflection flourier transformed infrared spectroscopy, thermal analysis, tensile tests, water contact angle, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, SEM, and AFM. Results indicated that the introduction of phenyl polysiloxane improved the thermal stability and remarkably increased the water contact angles accompanying with a comparable mechanical strength to the pure polyurethane. Meanwhile, it also brought out the decreased microphase separation and water absorption. The obvious surface migration has been observed in the SPUs, which changed their surface properties. Some voids were observed in all moisture curing SPUs system, but the phenyl silicone content impacted on the numbers and sizes of the voids. The phenyl groups introduced and carbon dioxide produced in the crosslinking procedure helped to form and stabilize the voids in the SPUs.

show abstract

Evaluation of two different reinforcing materials used with silicone auricular prostheses

Cited by 9 publications

References 10 publications

CAD/CAM silicone auricular prosthesis with thermoformed stiffening insert

CAD/CAM silicone auricular prosthesis with thermoformed stiffening insert

Advancements in Soft-Tissue Prosthetics Part B: The Chemistry of Imitating Life

Synthesis and characterization of phenyl polysiloxane modified polyurea/polyurethanes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About