Effect of two light activated in-office bleaching agents on microhardness of different esthetic restorative materials
Abstract
Background: Irradiation sources have been used to reduce the total in-office bleaching time. However, little is known about the effects of the light irradiation bleaching systems on the restorative materials. This in vitro study evaluated the microhardness of 6 different restorative materials during office bleaching procedures with blue light emitted diode and diode laser photoactivation.
Materials and Methods: FiltekTM supreme (nanofilled), Tetric EvoCeram (nanohybrid), Tescera ATL (ormocer), Clearfill Majesty Esthetic (nanofilled), Durafill VS (microfilled) and IPS Empress II (ceramic) restorative materials were selected in this study. Twenty specimens, 10 mm in diameter and 2 mm thick, were fabricated from each material using a Teflon mold. All specimens were randomly assigned to two groups (n=10). Group 1 received two topical applications of 35% hydrogen peroxide and was photoactivated using blue light emitted diode (800 mW/cm2) for 20s. Group 2 received topical application of 46% hydrogen peroxide using diode laser (wavelength 980 nm, average power 7 watt, energy setting 200 J, continuous mode) for 30s. Baseline and after bleaching microhardness measurements were taken with a Vickers hardness tester that was used with a 300 g for the porcelain and 100 g for the composite and ormocer specimens, the dwell time was 30 s for all groups. Data were analyzed statistically, with one-way-analysis of variance (ANOVA), post-hoc Tamhane's T2 and independent t tests.
Results: After application of both office bleaching agents, microhardness of all restorative materials tested were significantly decreased (p<.05). However, Tetric EvoCeram composite resin material showed the least microhardness value (p<.05).
Conclusion: Blue light emitted diode and diode laser activation hydrogen peroxide office bleaching agents have similar effects on the reduction of microhardness of restorative materials. The data of this study revealed that after bleaching, nanofilled (FS, CME), microfilled (Df) specimens demonstrated lower changes in microhardness values than nanohybrid (TEC) composite material.
Keywords
References
- 1.Haywood VB, Heymann HO. Nightguard vital bleaching. Quintessence Int 1989; 20:173-76.
- 2.Haywood VB. Achieving, maintaining and recovering successful tooth bleaching. J Esthet Dent 1996;8: 31-8.
- 3.Greenwall L. Bleaching Techniques in Restorative Dentistry: An Illustrated Guide. London: Martin Dunitz. 2001
- 4.Zekonis R, Matis BA, Cochran MA, Al Shetri SE, Eckert GJ, Carlson TJ. Clinical evaluation of in-office and at-home bleaching treatments. Oper Dent 2003;28:114-21.
- 5. Sulieman M, Addy M, Macdonald E, Rees JS. The bleaching depth of a 35% hydrogen peroxide based in-office product: a study in vitro. J Dent 2005;33:33-40.
- 6. Patel A, Louca C, Millar BJ. An in vitro comparison of tooth whitening techniques on natural tooth colour. Br Dent J 2008;10:516-7.
- 7. Joiner A. The bleaching of teeth: a review of the literature. J Dent 2006;34:412-9.
- 8. Giachetti L, Bertini F, Bambi C, Nieri M, Scaminaci Russo D. A randomized clinical trial comparing at-home and in-office tooth whitening techniques: A nine-month follow-up. J Am Dent Assoc 2010;141:1357-64.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Dentistry
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Özgün Yusuf Özyılmaz
Türkiye
Tuncay Alptekin
This is me
Türkiye
Filiz Aykent
Türkiye
Haluk Barış Kara
Türkiye
Publication Date
August 1, 2018
Submission Date
October 14, 2017
Acceptance Date
February 18, 2018
Published in Issue
Year 2018 Volume: 5 Number: 2
Cited By
The Effects of Office Bleaching Techniques on Nanoceramic Composite Resin
Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences
https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.1057225