Department of Operative Dentistry, Dental Materials and Endodontics, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, SP, Brazil.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Mar-Apr;21(2):112-7. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757201302117.
To evaluate the in vitro changes on the enamel surface after a micro-abrasion treatment promoted by different products.
Fifty (50) fragments of bovine enamel (15 mm × 5 mm) were randomly assigned to five groups (n=10) according to the product utilized: G1 (control)= silicone polisher (TDV), G2= 37% phosphoric acid (3M/ESPE) + pumice stone (SS White), G3= Micropol (DMC Equipment), G4= Opalustre (Ultradent) and G5= Whiteness RM (FGM Dental Products). Roughness and wear were the responsible variables used to analyze these surfaces in four stages: baseline, 60 s and 120 s after the micro-abrasion and after polishing, using a Hommel Tester T1000 device. After the tests, a normal distribution of data was verified, with repeated ANOVA analyses (p≤0.05) which were used to compare each product in different stages. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were applied for individual comparisons between the products in each stage (p≤0.05).
Means and standard deviations of roughness and wear (µm) after all the promoted stages were: G1=7.26(1.81)/13.16(2.67), G2=2.02(0.62)/37.44(3.33), G3=1.81(0.91)/34.93(6.92), G4=1.92(0.29)/38.42(0.65) and G5=1.98(0.53)/33.45(2.66). At 60 seconds, all products tended to produce less surface roughness with a variable gradual decrease over time. After polishing, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups, except for G1. Independent of the product utilized, the enamel wear occurred after the micro-abrasion.
In this in vitro study, enamel micro-abrasion presented itself as a conservative approach, regardless of the type of the paste compound utilized. These products promoted minor roughness alterations and minimal wear. The use of phosphoric acid and pumice stone showed similar results to commercial products for the micro-abrasion with regard to the surface roughness and wear.
评估不同产品促进的微研磨处理后牙釉质表面的体外变化。
将 50 个(50)块牛牙釉质(15mm×5mm)碎片随机分为 5 组(n=10),根据使用的产品进行分组:G1(对照)=硅胶抛光剂(TDV),G2=37%磷酸(3M/ESPE)+浮石(SS White),G3= Micropol(DMC 设备),G4= Opalustre(Ultradent)和 G5= Whiteness RM(FGM Dental Products)。粗糙度和磨损是负责分析这些表面的变量,在微研磨后 4 个阶段进行分析:基线、60 秒和 120 秒以及抛光后,使用 Hommel Tester T1000 设备。在测试后,验证数据呈正态分布,采用重复方差分析(p≤0.05),用于比较不同阶段的每种产品。在每个阶段的产品之间进行单向方差分析和 Tukey 检验(p≤0.05)。
所有促进阶段后的粗糙度和磨损平均值和标准差(µm)分别为:G1=7.26(1.81)/13.16(2.67),G2=2.02(0.62)/37.44(3.33),G3=1.81(0.91)/34.93(6.92),G4=1.92(0.29)/38.42(0.65)和 G5=1.98(0.53)/33.45(2.66)。60 秒时,所有产品都倾向于产生较少的表面粗糙度,随着时间的推移逐渐减少。抛光后,除 G1 外,各组之间无统计学差异。独立于使用的产品,微研磨后牙釉质发生磨损。
在这项体外研究中,牙釉质微研磨是一种保守的方法,无论使用的糊剂化合物类型如何。这些产品促进了较小的粗糙度变化和最小的磨损。使用磷酸和浮石在表面粗糙度和磨损方面与商业产品进行微研磨的结果相似。