Objectives:The purpose of this study was to determine color changes and surface roughness of composites when they were subjected to in-office bleaching.Methods:12 discs 15 mm in diameter and 2 mm thick were prepared from two shades (A2 & A4) of two composites, Durafil VS (DF) and TPH3 (TPH). Specimens were polished and stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37°C before being subjected to bleaching, staining, and re-bleaching. Each of the groups of specimens (DF-A2, DF-A4, TPH-A2 and TPH-A4) were subdivided into three subgroups (n=4) and bleached with Beyond, LumaWhite-Plus, and Opalescence-Boost. Specimens were then stained by immersing them in a coffee solution for 48 hours at 37°C, and then they were re-bleached. Colorimetric measurements were performed at baseline, after bleaching, after staining, and after re-bleaching. Surface roughness was determined with environmental SEM before and after bleaching. Data were statistically-analyzed.Results:None of the bleaching systems notably changed the color of composites (delta-E<2). Coffee staining affected DF specimens more than TPH. Stained specimens showed variable responses to whitening with no significant color change observed with TPH (delta-E<2) and significant changes observed with DF. Surface roughness significantly changed with bleaching, but the degree varied according to composite shade and bleaching agent.Conclusions:Three in-office bleaching agents had no significant color changes on two composites. DF showed more color change than TPH when immersed in coffee. Stained composites showed different degrees of whitening, with DF showing more response. Bleaching may adversely affect the surface texture of composites. Dentists should take into consideration that composite restorations may not respond to bleaching in the same way that natural teeth do.
Objective:This study was conducted to evaluate the microshear bond strength (μSBS) and ultramorphological characterization of glass ionomer (GI) cements; conventional GI cement (Fuji IX, CGI), resin modified GI (Fuji II LC, RMGI) and nano-ionomer (Ketac N100, NI) to enamel, dentin and cementum substrates.Materials and Methods:Forty-five lower molars were sectioned above the cemento-enamel junction. The occlusal surfaces were ground flat to obtain enamel and dentin substrates, meanwhile the cervical one-third of the root portion were utilized to evaluate the bonding efficacy to cementum substrate. Each substrate received microcylinders from the three tested materials; which were applied according to manufacturer instructions. μSBS was assessed using a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post-hoc test. Modes of failure were examined using stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification. Interfacial analysis of the bonded specimens was carried out using environmental field emission scanning electron microscope.Results:Two-way ANOVA revealed that materials, substrates and their interaction had a statistically significant effect on the mean μSBS values at P values; ˂0.0001, 0.0108 and 0.0037 respectively. RMGI showed statistically significant the highest μSBS values to all examined tooth substrates. CGI and RMGI show substrate independent bonding efficiency, meanwhile; NI showed higher μSBS values to dentin and cementum compared to enamel.Conclusion:Despite technological development of GI materials, mainly the nano-particles use, better results have not been achieved for both investigations, when compared to RMGI, independent of tooth substrate.
The use of ozone gas is a viable adjunct to fluoride-containing desensitizers in enhancing tubular occlusion, but is not effective with oxalate desensitizers.
Objectives:This in vitro study determined the effect of enamel pretreatment with phosphoric acid and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) on the bond strength of strong, intermediary strong, and mild self-etching adhesive systems.Methods:Ninety sound human premolars were used. Resin composite cylinders were bonded to flat ground enamel surfaces using three self-etching adhesive systems: strong Adper Prompt L-Pop (pH=0.9–1.0), intermediary strong AdheSE (pH=1.6–1.7), and mild Frog (pH=2). Adhesive systems were applied either according to manufacturer instructions (control) or after pretreatment with either phosphoric acid or EDTA (n=10). After 24 hours, shear bond strength was tested using a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/minute. Ultra-morphological characterization of the surface topography and resin/enamel interfaces as well as representative fractured enamel specimens were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).Results:Neither surface pretreatment statistically increased the mean shear bond strength values of either the strong or the intermediary strong self-etching adhesive systems. However, phosphoric acid pretreatment significantly increased the mean shear bond strength values of the mild self-etching adhesive system. SEM examination of enamel surface topography showed that phosphoric acid pretreatment deepened the same etching pattern of the strong and intermediary strong adhesive systems but converted the irregular etching pattern of the mild self-etching adhesive system to a regular etching pattern. SEM examination of the resin/enamel interface revealed that deepening of the etching pattern was consistent with increase in the length of resin tags. EDTA pretreatment had a negligible effect on ultra-morphological features.Conclusions:Use of phosphoric acid pretreatment can be beneficial with mild self-etching adhesive systems for bonding to enamel.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.