Suppr超能文献

比较研究牙釉质表面显微硬度再矿化对脱矿牙釉质的影响

Comparative assessment of enamel remineralisation on the surface microhardness of demineralized enamel - an study.

机构信息

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rkdf Dental College and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Orthodontics, Preventive Dentistry Department, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

PeerJ. 2022 Oct 7;10:e14098. doi: 10.7717/peerj.14098. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of the study was to compare two different remineralising materials containing casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate, bioactive glass on enamel surface microhardness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty premolars were used for specimen preparation. Group 1 (the control group) consisted of intact enamel samples, group 2: CPP-ACPF (Tooth Mousse Plus), group 3: bioenamel remineralising gel (Prevest DenPro). All specimens were subjected to demineralisation except the control group, followed by which remineralising agents were applied. A universal hardness tester was used to assess the surface microhardness of all samples. Results were analysed using one-way ANOVA test and comparison was analysed using Scheffe's least significant difference (LSD) test.

RESULTS

Both remineralising agents used in groups 2 and 3 have shown significant outcome in terms of improving the surface microhardness in comparison with the control group. Group 2 increased the enamel hardness by 8.34 where = 0.023 whereas group 3 increased the hardness by 5.87, where = 0.01.

CONCLUSION

Group 2 has a superior hardness value than group 3; however, no statistically significant results were obtained between both the groups.

摘要

目的

本研究的主要目的是比较两种不同的再矿化材料——含酪蛋白磷酸肽-无定形磷酸钙、生物活性玻璃对牙釉质表面显微硬度的影响。

材料与方法

使用 30 颗前磨牙进行标本制备。第 1 组(对照组)由完整的牙釉质样本组成,第 2 组:CPP-ACPF(牙慕斯 Plus),第 3 组:生物釉质再矿化凝胶(Prevest DenPro)。所有标本均进行脱矿处理,除对照组外,然后应用再矿化剂。使用万能硬度试验机评估所有样本的表面显微硬度。使用单因素方差分析对结果进行分析,并使用 Scheffe 的最小显著差异(LSD)检验进行比较分析。

结果

第 2 组和第 3 组使用的两种再矿化剂在提高表面显微硬度方面均明显优于对照组。第 2 组使牙釉质硬度增加了 8.34, = 0.023,而第 3 组使硬度增加了 5.87, = 0.01。

结论

第 2 组的硬度值优于第 3 组;然而,两组之间没有得到统计学上显著的结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ea92/9549882/56f285eb108c/peerj-10-14098-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验