Roselino Lourenço de Moraes Rego, Cruvinel Diogo Rodrigues, Chinelatti Michelle Alexandra, Pires-de-Souza Fernanda de Carvalho Panzeri
Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo, Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil.
J Dent. 2013 Nov;41 Suppl 5:e54-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.07.005. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of brushing and artificial accelerated ageing (AAA) on color stability and surface roughness of aesthetic restorative materials.
One hundred and twenty specimens (12 mm diameter × 2 mm thick), 40 of each material (n=8) were obtained using nanosized composite Z350 (3M ESPE), nanohybrid composite Tetric N-Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) and ceramic IPS e.max Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent), as control. Initial color (Spectrophotometer PCB 6807) and surface roughness (Surfcorder SE 1700) readouts were taken and the samples were separated into five groups (n=8) and treated as follows: Group 1: mechanical brushing with dentifrice RDA* 68 (Colgate), Group 2: mechanical brushing with dentifrice RDA* 180 (Colgate Total Plus Whitening), Group 3: AAA, Group 4: AAA followed by mechanical brushing with dentifrice RDA* 68 and Group 5: AAA followed by mechanical brushing with dentifrice RDA* 180. Mechanical brushing was performed for 205 min and AAA for 480 h; new color and surface roughness readouts were taken. Data were statistically analyzed (two-way ANOVA repeated measures, Bonferroni test, p<0.05).
Dentifrice abrasiveness was not significant for color change and surface roughness. When submitted to AAA+brushing, the color stability of Tetric was statistically significant (p<0.05) with both dentifrices and with dentifrice RDA* 180 for Z350. The roughness was different (p<0.05) for Z350 when brushed with RDA* 68 after AAA.
Dentifrice abrasiveness did not interfere in the ability to remove stains and roughness from aged samples. However, staining is material-dependent.
The abrasiveness of dentifrice does not change the color and surface roughness of the composites and does not help to remove surface stains from the aged samples.
本研究旨在评估刷牙和人工加速老化（AAA）对美学修复材料颜色稳定性和表面粗糙度的影响。
制备120个试件（直径12 mm×厚2 mm），每种材料40个（n = 8），分别使用纳米复合树脂Z350（3M ESPE）、纳米混合复合树脂Tetric N - Ceram（义获嘉伟瓦登特）和陶瓷IPS e.max Ceram（义获嘉伟瓦登特）作为对照。记录初始颜色（分光光度计PCB 6807）和表面粗糙度（表面粗糙度仪SE 1700）读数，将样本分为五组（n = 8）并进行如下处理：第1组：用摩擦系数为68的牙膏（高露洁）进行机械刷牙；第2组：用摩擦系数为180的牙膏（高露洁全效美白牙膏）进行机械刷牙；第3组：人工加速老化；第4组：人工加速老化后用摩擦系数为68的牙膏进行机械刷牙；第5组：人工加速老化后用摩擦系数为180的牙膏进行机械刷牙。机械刷牙时间为205分钟，人工加速老化时间为480小时；记录新的颜色和表面粗糙度读数。对数据进行统计学分析（双向方差分析重复测量、Bonferroni检验，p < 0.05）。
牙膏的磨蚀性对颜色变化和表面粗糙度无显著影响。当进行人工加速老化+刷牙处理时，Tetric的颜色稳定性在使用两种牙膏时均具有统计学意义（p < 0.05），对于Z350，使用摩擦系数为180的牙膏时也具有统计学意义。人工加速老化后用摩擦系数为68的牙膏刷牙时，Z350的粗糙度有所不同（p < 0.05）。
牙膏的磨蚀性不会影响去除老化样本上污渍和粗糙度的能力。然而，染色情况因材料而异。
牙膏的磨蚀性不会改变复合材料的颜色和表面粗糙度，也无助于去除老化样本上的表面污渍。
