Haralur Satheesh B, Albarqi Abdullah Turki, Alamodi Abdulellah Gharmallah, Alamri Abdulmajeed Ali, Aldail Saad Awdah, Al-Qarni Mohammed A, AlQahtani Saeed M, Alqahtani Nasser M
Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha 62529, Saudi Arabia.
College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha 62529, Saudi Arabia.
J Funct Biomater. 2024 Sep 3;15(9):256. doi: 10.3390/jfb15090256.
Esthetically pleasing temporary prostheses are often necessary for extended periods in a variety of clinical scenarios. Adjustments to the occlusion or margins are commonly needed before cementing the temporary prosthesis. Therefore, it is clinically necessary to repolish the rough surface to avoid biological and esthetic issues associated with rough surfaces. The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess and compare the impact of various polishing protocols on the surface roughness and color stability of three resin materials used for provisional crowns. A total of 150 specimens were fabricated from auto-polymerizing polymethyl methacrylate, bis-acryl composite, and Methyl methacrylate-LC resin using a stainless steel mold. Each material group was divided into five groups ( = 10) based on the applied surface treatment: positive control group (G1): no roughening or surface treatment, Negative control group (G2): acrylic bur-roughened surface without any polishing, the different surface treatment groups of silicon carbide and aluminum oxide stone polishing (G3), diamond-coated rubber twist (G4), and Surface Glaze (G5). An optical profilometer was used to assess the surface roughness of all samples. After undergoing 6000 cycles of thermocycling followed by immersion in a coffee solution for 15 days at 37 °C, color parameters were measured using a spectrophotometer both before and after a storage period to evaluate color differences. A two-way ANOVA test with α = 0.05 significance level was carried out to determine the impacts of both the materials utilized and the polishing protocol. Among the three types of resin examined, the bisacryl group exhibited superior surface quality in positive control groups, while PMMA resin demonstrated higher polishability. The diamond-coated rubber twits resulted in lower Ra values of 0.36 (0.01) µm, 0.52 (0.11) µm, and 0.28 (0.05) µm for PMMA, BAMA, and MMLC resins, respectively. The application of photo-polymerized surface glaze led to a plaque accumulation threshold of 0.2 µm across all resin groups. The greatest mean color change occurred in the negative control group, indicating a propensity for more staining on rougher surfaces. The Bisacryl resin exhibited higher ΔE values, whereas PMMA showed better color stability. The lowest ΔE values were found when the surface glaze was applied to all of the provisional crown resins. Untreated Bisacryl resin exhibited the lowest Ra values, while PMMA resins demonstrated superior surface morphology after polishing. PMMA provisional crown resins showed increased resistance to staining. The use of surface glaze enhanced both smoothness and color stability on the surfaces.
在各种临床情况下,美观的临时修复体通常需要长时间使用。在粘结临时修复体之前,通常需要调整咬合或边缘。因此,临床上有必要对粗糙表面进行再抛光,以避免与粗糙表面相关的生物学和美学问题。本体外研究的目的是评估和比较各种抛光方案对用于临时冠的三种树脂材料的表面粗糙度和颜色稳定性的影响。使用不锈钢模具由自凝聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯、双丙烯酸复合材料和甲基丙烯酸甲酯-LC树脂制作了总共150个样本。根据所应用的表面处理,每个材料组分为五组(每组n = 10):阳性对照组(G1):未进行粗糙化或表面处理;阴性对照组(G2):用丙烯酸车针粗糙化表面且未进行任何抛光;碳化硅和氧化铝石抛光的不同表面处理组(G3);金刚石涂层橡胶扭转工具(G4);表面釉(G5)。使用光学轮廓仪评估所有样本的表面粗糙度。在经历6000次热循环,然后在37℃下在咖啡溶液中浸泡15天后,在储存期前后使用分光光度计测量颜色参数,以评估颜色差异。进行显著性水平α = 0.05的双向方差分析,以确定所使用材料和抛光方案的影响。在所研究的三种树脂类型中,双丙烯酸组在阳性对照组中表现出优异的表面质量,而聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯树脂表现出更高的可抛光性。金刚石涂层橡胶扭转工具分别使聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯、双丙烯酸甲基丙烯酸酯和甲基丙烯酸甲酯-LC树脂的Ra值降低至0.36(0.01)μm、0.52(0.11)μm和0.28(0.05)μm。光聚合表面釉的应用导致所有树脂组的菌斑积聚阈值为0.2μm。最大的平均颜色变化发生在阴性对照组,表明粗糙表面更容易染色。双丙烯酸树脂表现出更高的ΔE值,而聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯表现出更好的颜色稳定性。当对所有临时冠树脂应用表面釉时,发现ΔE值最低。未处理的双丙烯酸树脂表现出最低的Ra值,而聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯树脂在抛光后表现出优异的表面形态。聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯临时冠树脂表现出更高的抗染色性。表面釉的使用增强了表面的光滑度和颜色稳定性。