Corrosion behavior of 2205 duplex stainless steel

The corrosion of 2205 duplex stainless steel was compared with that of AISI type 316L stainless steel. The 2205 stainless steel is a potential orthodontic bracket material with low nickel content (4 to 6 wt%), whereas the 316L stainless steel (nickel content: 10 to 14 wt%) is a currently used bracket material. Both stainless steels were subjected to electrochemical and immersion (crevice) corrosion tests in 37 degrees C, 0.9 wt% sodium chloride solution. Electrochemical testing indicates that 2205 has a longer passivation range than 316L. The corrosion rate of 2205 was 0.416 MPY (milli-inch per year), whereas 316L exhibited 0.647 MPY. When 2205 was coupled to 316L with equal surface area ratio, the corrosion rate of 2205 reduced to 0.260 MPY, indicating that 316L stainless steel behaved like a sacrificial anode. When 316L is coupled with NiTi, TMA, or stainless steel arch wire and was subjected to the immersion corrosion test, it was found that 316L suffered from crevice corrosion. On the other hand, 2205 stainless steel did not show any localized crevice corrosion, although the surface of 2205 was covered with corrosion products, formed when coupled to NiTi and stainless steel wires. This study indicates that considering corrosion resistance, 2205 duplex stainless steel is an improved alternative to 316L for orthodontic bracket fabrication when used in conjunction with titanium, its alloys, or stainless steel arch wires.

Influence of selected variables on adhesion testing

Three variables associated with adhesion testing were examined: (1) the test mode, shear and tension; (2) design of the tensile apparatus; and (3) tooth substrate, human and bovine. Findings revealed no significant differences in bond strength by one tensile test and a shear test. However, the shear test produced more true adhesive failures; thus it may be preferable to use a shear test for adhesion testing. Bond strengths with some adhesive systems differed significantly when tested by two different tensile apparatus. Design of the test apparatus appeared to affect values. Bond strength measurements obtained with human and bovine enamel were essentially comparable. Values with dentin varied. There appeared to be a trend for higher bond strength values with bovine than with human dentin.

Evaluation of materials and techniques for restoration of erosion areas

The data indicate that the two dentin bonding agents, used in conjunction with enamel acid etching, provided a superior seal of the cavity compared to the respective resins alone or with either the dentin bond agent or acid etching used alone. The seal of resin restorations placed with the total system (acid etch and dentin bond agent) were comparable to the seal of the glass ionomer cement restorations. Compared with the 2-week specimens, there was no increase in leakage of the 6-month resin restorations when inserted with dentin bond agents and acid etch. The sealing ability of the resin restorations in conservatively prepared cavities was superior to comparable resin restorations in cavities that had not been prepared. This did not appear to be true for glass ionomer cement restorations. Data obtained to compare the bond strength of resins as used in the study with that of glass ionomer cements do not indicate a precise correlation between bond strength and sealing ability. The exact role of dentin bonding agents await further evaluation of their stability over a prolonged period of time, particularly in clinical investigations.

Clinical performance and physical properties of twelve amalgam alloys

An assessment of the marginal failure rate of 1,041 restorations of twelve alloys was made at one year. In addition, physical property tests were conducted. A correlation was found between the clinical performance and creep (.79), flow (.62) and 24-hour compressive strength (.60).

Addition of fluoride to pit and fissure sealants--a feasibility study

The data obtained in this in vitro study indicate that contact with pit and fissure sealants to which NaF has been added in amounts ranging from 2 to 5% substantially increases the fluoride content of the enamel and reduces its solubility in acid. The properties of the materials do not seem to be impaired by the addition of fluoride in these amounts. It thus appears that this approach to providing a backup anticariogenic mechanism may, indeed, be feasible. However, further investigation must be done to confirm the anticariogenic effect and to establish the most efficacious means of fluoride incorporation in the materials.