Oper Dent. 2020 May/Jun;45(3):E114-E123. doi: 10.2341/19-102-L. Epub 2020 Feb 13.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of erosion or erosion-abrasion on bioactive materials and adjacent enamel/dentin areas.
Enamel and dentin blocks (4×4×2 mm) were embedded side by side in acrylic resin, and a standardized cavity (1.2×4×1.5 mm) was prepared between them. Preparations were restored with the following materials: composite resin (Filtek Z350, control); experimental composite containing di-calcium phosphate dihydrate particles (DCPD); Giomer (Beautifil II), high viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC, Fuji IX); and a resin-modified GIC (Fuji II LC). The specimens were submitted to two cycling models (n=10): erosion or erosion-abrasion. The challenges consisted of five-minute immersion in 0.3% citric acid solution, followed by 60-minute exposure to artificial saliva. Toothbrushing was carried out twice daily, 30 minutes after the first and last exposures to acid. Dental and material surface loss (SL, in μm) were determined by optical profilometry. Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (α=0.05).
Under erosion, for enamel, only the GIC groups presented lower SL values than Z350 (<0.001 for Fuji IX and =0.018 for Fuji II LC). For dentin, none of the materials showed significantly lower SL values than Z350 (>0.05). For material, the GICs had significantly higher SL values than those of Z350 (<0.001 for Fuji IX and =0.002 for Fuji II LC). Under erosion-abrasion, the enamel SL value was significantly lower around Fuji II LC compared with the other materials (<0.05). No significant differences were observed among groups for dentin SL (=0.063). The GICs and Giomer showed higher SL values than Z350 (<0.001 for the GICs and =0.041 for Giomer).
Both GIC-based materials were susceptible to erosive wear; however, they promoted the lowest erosive loss of adjacent enamel. Against erosion-abrasion, only Fuji II LC was able to reduce enamel loss. For dentin, none of the materials exhibited a significant protective effect.
本研究旨在评估侵蚀或侵蚀磨损对生物活性材料和相邻牙本质/牙釉质区域的影响。
将牙釉质和牙本质块（4×4×2 mm）并排嵌入丙烯酸树脂中，并在它们之间制备标准化腔（1.2×4×1.5 mm）。用以下材料修复准备：复合树脂（Filtek Z350，对照组）；含有二水磷酸二钙颗粒的实验性复合树脂（DCPD）；玻璃离子水门汀（GIC，Fuji IX）；树脂改性 GIC（Fuji II LC）。将标本提交给两种循环模型（n=10）：侵蚀或侵蚀磨损。挑战包括在 0.3%柠檬酸溶液中浸泡五分钟，然后在人工唾液中暴露 60 分钟。每天刷牙两次，在第一次和最后一次酸暴露后 30 分钟进行。通过光学轮廓仪测定牙齿和材料表面损失（SL，以μm计）。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Dunn 检验（α=0.05）分析数据。
在侵蚀作用下，对于牙釉质，只有 GIC 组的 SL 值低于 Z350（Fuji IX 组<0.001，Fuji II LC 组=0.018）。对于牙本质，没有一种材料的 SL 值明显低于 Z350（>0.05）。对于材料，GIC 的 SL 值明显高于 Z350（Fuji IX 组<0.001，Fuji II LC 组=0.002）。在侵蚀磨损下，与其他材料相比，Fuji II LC 周围的牙釉质 SL 值明显更低（<0.05）。各组间牙本质 SL 值无显著差异（=0.063）。GIC 类材料和 Giomer 的 SL 值高于 Z350（GIC 类材料<0.001，Giomer 类材料=0.041）。
两种基于 GIC 的材料均易受侵蚀性磨损影响；然而，它们促进了相邻牙釉质最低的侵蚀性损失。针对侵蚀磨损，只有 Fuji II LC 能够减少牙釉质的损失。对于牙本质，没有一种材料表现出显著的保护作用。
