Lopes Murilo Baena, Saquy Paulo Cesar, Moura Sandra Kiss, Wang Linda, Graciano Fabiana Mezzaroba Ortenzi, Correr Sobrinho Lourenço, Gonini Júnior Alcides
Department of Dentistry, Dental School, UNOPAR - University of North Parana, Londrina, PR, Brazil.
Braz Dent J. 2012;23(6):692-7. doi: 10.1590/s0103-64402012000600011.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of different sealants applied to a nanofiller composite resin. Forty specimens of Filtek Z-350 were obtained after inserting the material in a 6x3 mm stainless steel mold followed by light activation for 20 s. The groups were divided (n=10) according to the surface treatment applied: Control group (no surface treatment), Fortify, Fortify Plus and Biscover LV. The specimens were subjected to simulated toothbrushing using a 200 g load and 250 strokes/min to simulate 1 week, 1, 3 and 6 months and 1 and 3 years in the mouth, considering 10,000 cycles equivalent to 1 year of toothbrushing. Oral-B soft-bristle-tip toothbrush heads and Colgate Total dentifrice at a 1:2 water-dilution were used. After each simulated time, surface roughness was assessed in random triplicate readings. The data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at a 95% confidence level. The specimens were observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) after each toothbrushing cycle. The control group was not significantly different (p>0.05) from the other groups, except for Fortify Plus (p<0.05), which was rougher. No significant differences (p>0.05) were observed at the 1-month assessment between the experimental and control groups. Fortify and Fortify Plus presented a rougher surface over time, differing from the baseline (p<0.05). Biscover LV did not differ (p>0.05) from the baseline at any time. None of the experimental groups showed a significantly better performance (p>0.05) than the control group at any time. SEM confirmed the differences found during the roughness testing. Surface penetrating sealants did not improve the roughness of nanofiller composite resin.
本研究评估了应用于纳米填料复合树脂的不同封闭剂的有效性。将Filtek Z - 350材料插入6×3毫米不锈钢模具中,经光固化20秒后获得40个样本。根据所应用的表面处理方式将样本分组(n = 10):对照组(无表面处理)、Fortify、Fortify Plus和Biscover LV。使用200克负载、250次/分钟的频率对样本进行模拟刷牙,以模拟在口腔中1周、1个月、3个月、6个月以及1年和3年的情况,其中10000次循环相当于1年的刷牙次数。使用欧乐B软毛牙刷头和按1:2用水稀释的高露洁全效牙膏。在每个模拟时间后,随机进行三次重复读数以评估表面粗糙度。数据在95%置信水平下进行双向方差分析和Tukey检验。在每个刷牙周期后,通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)观察样本。对照组与其他组相比无显著差异(p>0.05),但Fortify Plus组除外(p<0.05),该组表面更粗糙。在1个月评估时,实验组和对照组之间未观察到显著差异(p>0.05)。随着时间推移,Fortify和Fortify Plus组的表面更粗糙,与基线相比有差异(p<0.05)。Biscover LV组在任何时候与基线相比均无差异(p>0.05)。在任何时候,没有一个实验组表现出比对照组显著更好的性能(p>0.05)。SEM证实了粗糙度测试中发现的差异。表面渗透封闭剂并未改善纳米填料复合树脂的粗糙度。