İKİ FARKLI DİŞ MACUNUNUN FARKLI RESTORATİF MATERYALLERİN YÜZEY PÜRÜZLÜLÜĞÜ ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

Year 2016, Volume: 26 Issue: 3, 399 - 406, 01.12.2016

Kanşad Pala Neslihan Tekçe , Hale Karakuyu Emre Özel

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.290243

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Amaç: Bu
çalışmanın amacı, diş macunlarının farklı restoratif materyallerin yüzey
pürüzlülüğüne etkisini incelemektir.

Gereç ve Yöntem:Bu çalışmada
toplam 40 adet kom- pozit disk oluşturulmuştur. Kompozit diskler iki direkt
kompozit [Aelite All Purpose Body (Bisco, Schaumburg, IL, Amerika), Clearfil
Majesty Posterior, (Kuraray Medi- cal Inc, Tokyo, Japonya)], bir indirekt
[Epricord (Ku- raray)] kompozit ve bir kompomer [(Dyract XP (Dyract XP, Dentsply,
Konstanz, Almanya)] materyallerinden oluşturulmuştur (n=10). Hazırlanan
kompozitlerin cila- ları PoGo kitleri ile yapılmıştır. Her bir grupta yer alan
kompozitler ikiye ayrılmış (n=5) ve bu alt gruplara iki farklı diş macunu
(Colgate, Sensodyne) bir elektrikli diş fırçası aracılığıyla 12 dakika boyunca
uygulanmıştır. Her bir örneğin başlangıç, cila sonrası ve diş fırçalama sonrası
değerleri ayrı ayrı kaydedilmiştir. İstatistiksel analizler repeated tek yönlü varyans analizi (Anova) ile
yapılmıştır (p<0.05).

Bulgular:Bütün
gruplarda en düşük pürüzlülük değer- lerini anlamlı olarak şeffaf bant altında
hazırlanan ör- nekler sergilemiştir (p<0.05). Polisajdan sonra en dü- şük pürüzlülük
değerini Aelite (0,347±0,21), en
yüksek pürüzlülük değerlerini Dyract XP (0,453±0,11) sergile- miştir (p>0.05).

Sonuç: Bu
çalışmada kullanılan bütün restoratif ma- teryaller iki farklı diş macunu ile
fırçalanma işlemi ar- kasından istatistiksel olarak başlangıç değerleri ile ben-
zer sonuçlar sergilemiştir. Ancak Sensodyne; Aelite, Majesty Posterior ve
Dyract XP’nin pürüzsüzlüğünü hafif düzeyde geliştirirken, Colgate Epricord ve
Dyract XP’nin pürüzsüzlüğünü hafif düzeyde geliştirmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Rezin
kompozit, mikrohibrit, nanohibrit, diş macunu, yüzey pürüzlülüğü

EFFECT OF
THE TWO DİFFERENT TOOTHPASTES ON SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF
DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of toothpastes on surface roughness ​​of different restorative materials.

Materials and Methods: 40 composite discs were created for this study. Composite disc are constituted from two direct composites [Aelite All Purpose Body (Bisco, Schaumburg, IL, USA), Clearfil Majesty Posterior, (Kuraray Medical Inc, Tokyo, Japan)], an indirect composite [Epricord (Kuraray)] and a compomer [(Dyract XP (Dyract XP, Dentsply, Germany)] (n=10). The PoGo kit was used for finishing and polishing procedures. Each composite group were divided into two (n=5) and two different toothpaste (Colgate, Sensodyne) were applied by an electric toothbrush for 12 minutes. Initial values, and after polishing and tooth brushing values for each material were recorded separately. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA (p<0.05).

Results:
In all groups; the lowest roughness values
were obtained from examples prepared under the mylar strip (significantly)(p<0.05). After polishing, Aelite (0.347±0.21) exhibited the
lowest roughness values, and Dyract XP (0.453±0.11) exhibited the highest
values (p>0.05).

Conclusion: All restorative materials used in this study exhibited statistically similar results after tooth brushing with two different toothpastes according to baseline. Sensodyne improved smoothness of Aelite, Majesty Posterior and Dyract XP, while Colgate improved smoothness of Epricord and Dyract XP. 

Keywords: Resin
composite, microhybrid, nanohybrid, toothpaste, surface roughness

Keywords

Rezin kompozit, mikrohibrit, nanohibrit, diş macunu

References

• 1- Ferracane JL. Resin composite—State of the art dental materials. Dent Mater 2011;27:29-38.
• 2- Kwon Y, Ferracane J, Lee IB. Effect of layering methods composite type, and flowable liner on the polymerization shrinkage stress of light cured composites. Dent Mater 2012;28:801-9.
• 3- Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R. Mechanical properties of new composite restorative materials. J Biomed Mater Res 2000;53:353-61.
• 4- Frankenberger R, García-Godoy F, Lohbauer U, Petschelt A, Krämer N. Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part I: in vitro investigations. Am J Dent 2005;18:23-7.
• 5- Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light-cured packable composite resins. Dent Mater 2000;16:33-40.
• 6- Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105:97-116.
• 7- Senawongse P, Pongprueksa P. Surface roughness of nanofill and nanohybrid resin composites after polishing and brushing. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19:265-73.
• 8- Janus J, Fauxpoint G, Arntz Y, Pelletier H, Etienne O. Surface roughness and morphology of three nano composites after two different polishing treatments by a multi technique approach. Dent Mater 2010;26:416-25.
• 9- Moszner N, Klapdohr S. Nanotechnology for dental composites. Int J Nanotechnol 2004;1:130-56.
• 10- Weitman RT, Eames WB. Plaque accumulation on composite surfaces after various finishing procedures. J Am Dent Assoc1975;91:101-6
• 21- Neme AM, Wagner WC, Pink FE, Frazier KB. The effect of prophylactic polishing pastes and toothbrushingon the surface roughness of resin composite materials in vitro. Oper Dent 2003;28:808-15.
• 22- Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Ohmiti K, Rousson V. Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load. Dent Mater 2010;26:306-19.
• 23- Gömeç Y, Dörter C, Yıldız E, Efes BG. Diş rengindeki restoratif materyallerin diş fırçalama işlemi sonrasında yüzey özellikleri. İstanbul Univ Diş Hek Fak Derg 1999;33:37-44.
• 24- Cilli R, Mattos MC, Honorio HM, Rios D, Araujo P, Prakki A. The role of surface sealants in the roughness of composites after a simulated toothbrushing test. J Dent 2009;37:970-7.
• 25- Ereifej NS, Oweis YG, Eliades G. The effect of polishing technique on 3-D surface roughness and gloss of dental restorative resin composites. Oper Dent 2013;38:1-12.
• 26- Heintze SD, Forjanic M. Surface roughness of different dental materials before and after simulated toothbrushing in vitro. Oper Dent 2005;30:617-26.
• 27- Rooder LB, Powers JM. Surface roughness of resin composite prepared by single-use and multi-use diamonds. Am J Dent 2004;17:109-12.
• 28- Anfe T, Caneppele TMF, Agra CM, Vieira GF. Microhardness assessment of different commercial brands of resin composites with different degrees of translucence. Braz Oral Res 2008;22:358-63.
• 29- Park SH, Krejci I, Lutz F. Microhardness of resin composites polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing. Oper Dent 2002;27:30-7.
• 30- Neme AL, Frazier KB, Roeder LB, Debner TL. Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent 2002;27:50-8.
• 41- West N, Seong J, Macdonald E, He T, Barker M, Hooper S. A randomized clinical study to measure the anti-erosion benefits of a stannous-containing sodium fluoride dentifrice. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2015;19:182-7.