Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Ankara, Ankara, Turkey.
J Prosthodont. 2013 Jan;22(1):69-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00918.x. Epub 2012 Sep 17.
Oxygenating agents like carbamide peroxide or H(2) O(2) are commonly used whitening agents. They have varying influence on the color and surface roughness of resin-based restorative materials and teeth. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an at-home peroxide whitening agent applied through a whitening strip on the color and surface roughness of a nanofilled composite resin and an ormocer-based resin.
Disc-shaped (2 mm thick, 10 mm diameter) nanofilled resin composite (n = 10) and ormocer (n = 10) specimens were prepared. All specimens were treated with a whitening strip. Whitening procedures were performed applying a 6.5% hydrogen peroxide whitening strip (Crest White Strips Professional) for 30 minutes twice each day for a period of 21 consecutive days. During the test intervals, the specimens were rinsed under running distilled water for 1 minute to remove the whitening agents and immersed in 37°C distilled water until the next treatment. Surface roughness and color of the specimens were measured with a profilometer and a colorimeter, respectively, before and after whitening. Color changes were calculated (ΔE) using L*, a*, and b* coordinates. Repeated measures of variance analysis and Duncan test were used for statistical evaluation (α= 0.05).
The average surface roughness of composite increased from 1.4 Ra to 2.0 Ra, and from 0.8 Ra to 0.9 Ra for the ormocer material; however, these changes in roughness after whitening were not significant (p > 0.05). Also, when two materials were compared, the surface roughness of restorative materials was not different before and after whitening (p > 0.05). L* and b* values for each material changed significantly after whitening (p < 0.05). ΔE values (before/after whitening) calculated for composite (11.9) and ormocer (16.1) were not significantly different from each other (p > 0.05).
The tested whitening agent did not affect the surface roughness of either resin-based restorative material. Both materials became brighter after whitening. The behavior of the materials in the yellow/blue axis was opposite to each other after whitening. Each material had clinically unacceptable color change after whitening (ΔE > 5.5); however, the magnitude of the color change of materials was similar (p > 0.05). According to the results of this study, with the use of materials tested, patients should be advised that existing composite restorations may bleach along with the natural teeth, and replacement of these restorations after whitening may not be required.
过氧化脲或 H(2)O(2)等增氧剂是常用的美白剂。它们对树脂基修复材料和牙齿的颜色和表面粗糙度有不同的影响。本研究旨在评估通过美白条施加的家用过氧化物美白剂对纳米复合树脂和有机硅树脂基树脂的颜色和表面粗糙度的影响。
制备了(2 毫米厚,10 毫米直径)纳米复合树脂(n = 10)和有机硅树脂(n = 10)的圆盘状样本。所有样本均用美白条处理。美白程序每天两次应用 6.5%过氧化氢美白条(佳洁士美白条专业版)30 分钟,共 21 天。在测试间隔期间,用流水冲洗样本 1 分钟以去除美白剂,并将其浸入 37°C 蒸馏水中直至下一次处理。在美白前后,分别使用轮廓仪和分光光度计测量样本的表面粗糙度和颜色。使用 L*、a和 b坐标计算颜色变化(ΔE)。使用方差分析和 Duncan 检验进行重复测量的统计评估(α=0.05)。
复合材料的平均表面粗糙度从 1.4 Ra 增加到 2.0 Ra,有机硅树脂材料从 0.8 Ra 增加到 0.9 Ra,但美白后粗糙度的这些变化并不显著(p > 0.05)。此外,当比较两种材料时,美白前后修复材料的表面粗糙度没有差异(p > 0.05)。美白后,每种材料的 L和 b值均有显著变化(p < 0.05)。计算复合材料(11.9)和有机硅树脂(16.1)美白前后的ΔE 值(美白前/后)彼此之间无显著差异(p > 0.05)。
测试的美白剂不会影响任何一种树脂基修复材料的表面粗糙度。两种材料美白后都变得更亮。美白后,材料在黄/蓝轴上的行为相反。美白后,每种材料的颜色变化都有临床不可接受(ΔE > 5.5);然而,材料的颜色变化幅度相似(p > 0.05)。根据本研究结果,使用测试材料,应告知患者现有的复合树脂可能会随天然牙齿一起漂白,并且美白后可能不需要更换这些修复体。