Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Wander José da Silva
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Master's Dissertation |
| Press: | Piracicaba, SP. |
| Institution: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Faculdade de Odontologia de Piracicaba |
| Defense date: | 2005-09-30 |
| Examining board members: |
Altair Antoninha Del Bel Cury;
Renata Cunha Matheus Rodrigues Garcia;
Rodrigo Nunes Rached.
|
| Advisor: | Altair Antoninha Del Bel Cury; Pedro Luiz Rosalen |
| Abstract | |
The high prevalence of candidosis in denture wearers, and its association to Candida spp. as principal pathogen is well established. Besides, there are many studies about candidosis etiology, predisposing factors and its treatment using antifungal agents such as Fluconazole (FLU) and Nystatin (NYS). However, little work has been performed to explore the effects of these antifungal agents on acrylic resin surface. The aim of this study was to verify the influence of NYS, FLU, and propolis orobase gel over surface acrylic resins. Distillate water and orobase gel without any active component were used as control groups. Specimens (3.0 x 2.5 x 0.5 cm) were fabricated from wax moulds using heat cured (HC = Clássico; groups 1 to 5) or microwave cured (MW = Onda Cry; groups 6 to 10) acrylics resin, both processed according to manufacturers¿ instructions. After polymerized the specimens were polished and had their surface roughness (SR), contact angle (CA), surface free energy (SFE) and hardness (HD) measured. The surface treatments were done with antifungal agents and controls. The specimens had their surface toothbrushed 3 times a day during the 14 days of exposure to antifungal agents. The antifungal agents¿ solutions and gels were replaced daily. Measurements to all variables were performed in days 3, 7, 10 and 14. Components from antifungal agents that could be incorporated to acrylic resin measured with liquid chromatography. The results showed that SR increased for both acrylic resins and the treatment with propolis showed higher values and statistically different from the others (p<0.05). No statistical difference (Tukey test, p>0.05) was found regarding CA and SFE. No presence of FLU or NYS were detected in chromatography and no difference (p<0.05) between acrylic resins were detect to orobase gels detection. Scanning electronic microscopy evaluation showed surface alterations after treatment. Within the limits of this study, it is possible to conclude that antifungal agents are able to interfere with the surface properties of acrylic resins that are associated to Candida spp. adhesion (AU) | |