Comparative evaluation of surface properties of enamel and different esthetic restorative materials under erosive and abrasive challenges: An in vitro study.

INTRODUCTION

Noncarious tooth surface loss is a normal physiological process occurring throughout the life, but it can often become a problem affecting function, esthetics or cause pain.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of erosive and abrasive challenges on the surface microhardness and surface wear of enamel and three different restorative materials, that is, nanofilled composite, microfilled composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) by using Vickers microhardness tester and profilometer respectively.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Nanofilled composite (Filtek(™) Z350 × T), microfilled composite (Heliomolar(®)) and RMGIC (Fuji II LC) were used in the study.

RESULTS

Nanofilled composite resin has the best resistance to erosion and/or abrasion among all the materials tested, followed by microfilled composite and RMGIC respectively.

CONCLUSION

Toothbrush abrasion has a synergistic effect with erosion on substance loss of human enamel, composites, and RMGIC. The susceptibility to acid and/or toothbrush abrasion of human enamel was higher compared to restorative materials.