Comparison of natural and artificial root caries lesions using microcomputed tomography and microhardness test

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Australian dental journal Pub Date : 2023-04-18 DOI:10.1111/adj.12957
Y Tsuda, JEA Palamara, R Hardiman, J Tagami, MF Burrow
{"title":"Comparison of natural and artificial root caries lesions using microcomputed tomography and microhardness test","authors":"Y Tsuda,&nbsp;JEA Palamara,&nbsp;R Hardiman,&nbsp;J Tagami,&nbsp;MF Burrow","doi":"10.1111/adj.12957","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This study compared natural root caries lesions with artificial root caries lesions prepared with one of the two demineralising solutions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Twelve natural root caries lesions on upper incisors and 24 artificial root lesions were prepared on sound root surfaces using 50 mM acetic acid, 1.5 mM CaCl<sub>2</sub>, 0.9 mM KH<sub>2</sub>PO<sub>4</sub> at pH 5.0 or 80 mL/L Noverite K-702 polyacrylate solution, 500 mg/L hydroxyapatite, 0.1 mol/L lactic acid at pH 4.8 (n = 12/group) for 96 hours. Lesions were scanned using micro-CT. Inciso-gingival oriented images were analysed and mineral density calculated at 7.5 μm increments from the surface to 225-μm deep. Sectioned lesions were analysed by Knoop microhardness up to 250 μm from the lesion surface. Data were analysed by the Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Natural and artificial lesion mean mineral densities were not statistically different (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05). Mineral density from the surface to 75 μm was greater in natural lesions and from 150 to 225 μm was greater in artificial lesions (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05). Microhardness values were statistically higher in artificial lesions (<i>P</i> &lt; 0.05); no difference was found among artificial lesions produced by the two solutions (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05). Mineral density and microhardness of natural and artificial root caries are different from each other. A greater mineralized surface layer existed on natural lesions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":8593,"journal":{"name":"Australian dental journal","volume":"68 2","pages":"120-124"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/adj.12957","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background

This study compared natural root caries lesions with artificial root caries lesions prepared with one of the two demineralising solutions.

Methods

Twelve natural root caries lesions on upper incisors and 24 artificial root lesions were prepared on sound root surfaces using 50 mM acetic acid, 1.5 mM CaCl2, 0.9 mM KH2PO4 at pH 5.0 or 80 mL/L Noverite K-702 polyacrylate solution, 500 mg/L hydroxyapatite, 0.1 mol/L lactic acid at pH 4.8 (n = 12/group) for 96 hours. Lesions were scanned using micro-CT. Inciso-gingival oriented images were analysed and mineral density calculated at 7.5 μm increments from the surface to 225-μm deep. Sectioned lesions were analysed by Knoop microhardness up to 250 μm from the lesion surface. Data were analysed by the Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction.

Results

Natural and artificial lesion mean mineral densities were not statistically different (P > 0.05). Mineral density from the surface to 75 μm was greater in natural lesions and from 150 to 225 μm was greater in artificial lesions (P < 0.05). Microhardness values were statistically higher in artificial lesions (P < 0.05); no difference was found among artificial lesions produced by the two solutions (P > 0.05). Mineral density and microhardness of natural and artificial root caries are different from each other. A greater mineralized surface layer existed on natural lesions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自然与人工牙根龋病变的显微计算机断层扫描及显微硬度测试比较
本研究比较了用两种脱矿液中的一种制备的天然牙根龋和人工牙根龋。方法采用50 mM乙酸、1.5 mM CaCl2、0.9 mM KH2PO4 (pH 5.0)或80 mL/L Noverite K-702聚丙烯酸酯溶液、500 mg/L羟基磷灰石、0.1 mol/L乳酸(pH 4.8) (n = 12/组)在健全根表面制备12个天然牙根龋和24个人工牙根龋。用micro-CT扫描病变。分析了切牙牙龈定向图像,并计算了从表面到225-μm深度每7.5 μm的矿物质密度。从病变表面到250 μm,用Knoop显微硬度对切片病变进行分析。数据通过Dunn's测试和Bonferroni校正进行分析。结果自然病变与人工病变的平均矿物质密度差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。自然病变从表面到75 μm的矿物质密度较大,人工病变从150 μm到225 μm的矿物质密度较大(P < 0.05)。人工病变组显微硬度值较高,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05);两种溶液产生的人工病变无差异(P > 0.05)。天然和人工牙根龋的矿物质密度和显微硬度存在差异。自然损伤上存在较大的矿化表面层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Australian dental journal
Australian dental journal 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Dental Journal provides a forum for the exchange of information about new and significant research in dentistry, promoting the discipline of dentistry in Australia and throughout the world. It comprises peer-reviewed research articles as its core material, supplemented by reviews, theoretical articles, special features and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
ADRF Special Research Supplement December 2024. Supplement introduction. Assessment of teledentistry in improving access to dental care: a systematic review. Obstructive sleep apnoea, sleep bruxism and gastroesophageal reflux - mutually interacting conditions? A literature review. Sleep-disordered breathing - clinical spectrum.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1