Faculty of Dentistry, Oral and Clinical Sciences, Centre for Clinical, Oral and Translational Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, United Kingdom.
Faculty of Dentistry, Oral and Clinical Sciences, Centre for Clinical, Oral and Translational Sciences, King's College London, London SE1 9RT, United Kingdom.
J Dent. 2023 Sep;136:104652. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104652. Epub 2023 Aug 6.
This study compared the surface change on natural and polished enamel exposed to a joint mechanical and chemical wear regimen.
Human enamel samples were randomly assigned to natural (n = 30) or polished (n = 30) groups, subjected to erosion (n = 10, 0.3% citric acid, 5 min), abrasion (n = 10, 30 s), or a combination (n = 10). Wear in the form of step height was measured with a non-contact profilometer, and surface changes were inspected with SEM on selected sections. Data was normalised and underwent repeated measures MANOVA, accounting for substrate and erosive challenge as independent variables, with Bonferroni correction for significant post hoc interactions.
After four cycles, polished samples had mean step heights of 3.08 (0.40) μm after erosion and 4.08 (0.37) μm after erosion/abrasion. For natural samples, these measurements were 1.52 (0.22) μm and 3.62 (0.39) μm, respectively. Natural surfaces displayed less wear than polished surfaces under erosion-only conditions (p<0.0001), but the difference disappeared with added abrasion. SEM revealed a shallow subsurface layer for polished surfaces and natural ones undergoing only erosion. However, natural surfaces exposed to both erosion and abrasion showed deeper subsurface changes up to 50 µm.
Natural enamel, when exposed to erosion alone, showed less wear and minimal subsurface alterations. But with added abrasion, natural enamel surfaces saw increased wear and notable subsurface changes compared to polished ones.
The pronounced subsurface lesions observed on eroded/abraded natural enamel surfaces highlight how combined wear challenges may accelerate tooth tissue loss.
本研究比较了暴露于机械和化学联合磨损方案下的天然釉质和抛光釉质表面的变化。
将人釉质样本随机分为天然组（n=30）或抛光组（n=30），进行侵蚀（n=10，0.3%柠檬酸，5 分钟）、磨损（n=10，30 秒）或两者的联合处理（n=10）。采用非接触式轮廓仪测量磨损形式的台阶高度，并在选定部位用 SEM 检查表面变化。数据经过正态化处理，并进行重复测量 MANOVA，将基底和侵蚀性挑战作为独立变量，采用 Bonferroni 校正进行显著的事后交互作用分析。
经过四个循环，侵蚀后抛光样本的平均台阶高度为 3.08（0.40）μm，侵蚀/磨损后为 4.08（0.37）μm。对于天然样本，这些测量值分别为 1.52（0.22）μm和 3.62（0.39）μm。仅在侵蚀条件下，天然表面的磨损比抛光表面少（p<0.0001），但加入磨损后，差异消失。SEM 显示，抛光表面和仅受侵蚀的天然表面存在浅层的亚表面层。然而，天然表面在同时受到侵蚀和磨损的情况下，亚表面的变化更深，可达 50μm。
天然釉质在单独受到侵蚀时，磨损较少，亚表面变化最小。但在加入磨损后，与抛光釉质相比，天然釉质表面的磨损增加，亚表面变化明显。
在受到侵蚀/磨损的天然釉质表面观察到的明显的亚表面损伤突出表明，联合磨损挑战可能会加速牙齿组织的丧失。
