Mujdeci Arzu, Gokay Osman
Department of Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
J Prosthet Dent. 2006 Apr;95(4):286-9. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.01.010.
There is no consensus concerning the effect of bleaching gels on microhardness of restorative materials. Information about the effect of whitening strips on microhardness of restorative materials is also limited.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a bleaching gel and a whitening strip on the microhardness of 3 tooth-colored restorative materials.
Forty cylindrical specimens (6 x 2 mm) of each restorative material, including a nanohybrid composite resin (Grandio), a polyacid-modified composite resin (Dyract eXtra), and a glass-ionomer cement (Ionofil Molar AC), were prepared and stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours. The specimens were then polished using medium, fine, and superfine polishing disks and stored in 37 degrees C distilled water for 7 days. Specimens were divided into 4 groups (n=10). One group was selected for baseline Vickers hardness measurements (load 100 g, dwell time 20 seconds) of the top surfaces. The other 3 groups were treated for 21 days with 1 of the following: distilled water (control), bleaching gel (10% carbamide peroxide), or whitening strip (14% hydrogen peroxide). The top surfaces of the treated specimens were also subjected to the same hardness testing performed for the baseline specimens. Data were analyzed with 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference tests (alpha=.05).
There were no significant differences in microhardness between the test groups of each restorative material. However, significant differences in microhardness were observed among restorative materials. For all test groups, composite resin showed the highest hardness values, whereas glass-ionomer cement presented the lowest (P<.05).
The bleaching products used in this study did not adversely affect the microhardness of the restorative materials.
关于漂白凝胶对修复材料显微硬度的影响,目前尚无共识。关于美白牙贴对修复材料显微硬度影响的信息也很有限。
本研究的目的是评估一种漂白凝胶和一种美白牙贴对三种牙齿颜色修复材料显微硬度的影响。
制备每种修复材料的40个圆柱形试件(6×2毫米),包括纳米混合复合树脂(Grandio)、聚酸改性复合树脂(Dyract eXtra)和玻璃离子水门汀(Ionofil Molar AC),并在37℃蒸馏水中储存24小时。然后使用中号、细号和超细抛光盘对试件进行抛光,并在37℃蒸馏水中储存7天。将试件分为4组(n = 10)。选择一组对顶面进行基线维氏硬度测量(载荷100克,保压时间20秒)。其他3组分别用以下一种处理21天:蒸馏水(对照)、漂白凝胶(10%过氧化脲)或美白牙贴(14%过氧化氢)。对处理后的试件顶面也进行与基线试件相同的硬度测试。数据采用双向方差分析和Tukey真实显著性差异检验进行分析(α = 0.05)。
每种修复材料的测试组之间显微硬度没有显著差异。然而,在修复材料之间观察到显微硬度有显著差异。对于所有测试组,复合树脂显示出最高的硬度值,而玻璃离子水门汀呈现出最低的硬度值(P < 0.05)。
本研究中使用的漂白产品对修复材料的显微硬度没有不利影响。