Influence of topical acidulated phosphate fluoride on surface roughness of human enamel and different restorative materials

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the influence of topical acidulated phosphate fluoride on the surface roughness of both human enamel and different restorative materials.Methods: Resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer -V), microhybrid composite resin with fluoride (Tetric Ceram -T), and nanofiller composite resin without fluoride (Z350 -Z) were evaluated. Acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF, 1.23%) was applied to half of the specimens (groups VF, TF, ZF and EF). Ten intact human third molars were used to obtain enamel specimens (E). Six experimental groups (n=10) and two control groups (n=10) were formed. The mean surface roughness (Ra) of both the restorative materials and enamel, with and without fluoride, was evaluated with a profilometer. Data were analyzed with an ANOVA, Tukey's test, Student's t-test, and Dunn-Bonferroni test at the 5% significance level.Results: The mean values of surface roughness, in micrometers, were as follows: Z=0.60; TF=1.00; ZF=1.05; VF=1.18; T=2.10; V=2.70; E=16.99; and EF=21.19. Both E and EF presented significantly higher surface roughness than the other experimental groups.Conclusion: It was concluded that APF increased the surface roughness of enamel and decreased the surface roughness of both resin-modified glass-ionomer cement and microhybrid composite resin with fluoride. The surface roughness of the nanofiller composite resin was not modified by APF.

Impact of CPP-Acpf and Sodium Fluoride Remineralizing Pasts on Surface Texture of Resin Composites

“…Papagiannoulis et al [67] stated that fluoride can disrupt the filler-matrix interface through three possible mechanisms: (1) hydrogen bonds of silanol groups are affected by rearrangement of the water monolayer adsorbed on filler, (2) hydrolysis of the organosilicon ester group, and (3) disorganization of the siloxane network formed from the condensation of intramolecular silanol groups, which stabilizes the interface. However, our findings are contrary to that of Botta et al [66], who found that the topical application of APF did not cause alteration in surface roughness of FZ350. Such contrary could be related to the difference in the type and concentration of fluoride agents used.…”

“…Phosphoric acid has the ability to etch the filler particles [14] , that exposed after degradation of the superficial resin matrix due to water sorption and when these fillers are very small, as in the nanocomposite, the size of the defects left are practically undetectable, resulting in surface smoothening [65] . Another possible cause for a such smoothening effect could be attributed to the retention of CPP-ACP nano-clusters in the porosities created by water sorption [66] . On the other hand, the high roughness values of VF after application of TMP may be related to the large filler particles size of this microhybride composite in comparison to that of nano-composites.…”

“…Generally, F250 and FBF nanohybrid composites displayed improved surface smoothness compared to VF, although it was less than that of F350. These results can be attributed to the composition of these composites, where nano fillers dislodgement is less likely to occur, while the large filler particles of microhybrid composite can be pulled away, leaving large pits or craters on the surface [66] . F250, F350, and FBF had higher filler content compared to FV, since nanotechnology allows to get high filler loading of nano-composites.…”

The effect of CPP-ACP containing fluoride on Streptococcus mutans adhesion and enamel roughness

“…It means that the starting point of surface roughness value was above critical value for bacterial colonization (0.2 µm). 21 The study suggested that the application of CPP-ACP containing fluoride before and after bleaching was effective in reducing S. mutans accumulation and enamel roughness.…”

Análise da rugosidade superficial de uma resina composta tratada com gel fluoretado em diferentes pH

“…Um cálculo amostral foi realizado no site "openepi.com" para comparação de médias. Para tal, foram utilizados os seguintes parâmetros: intervalo de confiança bilateral de 95%, poder do estudo de 80%, e diferença média de 4,2 Ra (μm) entre grupos, valor baseado em um estudo anterior 14 . O resultado foi um tamanho amostral de n = 15 espécimes por grupo necessárias para encontrar diferença estatística na média de rugosidade superficial.…”