不同表面光洁度修复材料对牙釉质磨损的比较评价-体外研究

F. Khan, Anup Vyas
{"title":"不同表面光洁度修复材料对牙釉质磨损的比较评价-体外研究","authors":"F. Khan, Anup Vyas","doi":"10.21276//ujds.2022.8.4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim:The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of different surface finish of various restorative materials on the wear of opposing enamel.Objectives of the study:1.To compare the amount of enamel loss in experimental groups of various restorative materials at different intervals of masticatory cycles. 2.To compare and evaluate the most compatible finished or polished surface of the restorative material causing least enamel wear. Materials and Methods: A total of 90 samples were prepared for this study - 75 in disc form and 15 enamel antagonist and divided into 6 groups. Group 1 - Enamel vs Enamel antagonist, Group 2 - Enamel vs Fiber Reinforced Composite disc, Group 3 Enamel vs  Autoglazed metal ceramic disc , Group 4 - Enamel vs  Overglazed metal ceramic disc, Group 5 - Enamel vs Polished  metal ceramic  disc by polishing kit, and Group 6 - Enamel vs PEEK disc were fabricated. 105 extracted premolars were collected and randomly divided into six groups of 15 each and 15 for enamel antagonist. Each tooth sample was weighed before wear testing using electronic analytical balance of 0.0001 g accuracy. Occlusal surfaces of these teeth were then abraded against the substrates in a wear machine for a total of 10,000 cycles. Each tooth sample was weighed after 5000 cycles and after the total of 10,000 cycles, respectively, using the same balance. Differences in weight of tooth samples before and after wear testing were evaluated statistically using One-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s post hoc tests was used. Results:  The values obtained for overall mean percentage weight loss after 10000 rotations in increasing order is observed: Group 1 (Enamel Vs Enamel 0.0043 ± 0.00) < Group 6 (Enamel Vs PEEK disc 00.0131 ± 0.01) < Group 2 (Enamel Vs Fiber reinforced composite 0.0258 ± 0.01) < Group 5 (Enamel Vs Polished metal ceramic disc 0.0294 ± 0.00) < Group 3 (Enamel Vs Autoglazed metal ceramic disc 0.0318 ± 0.01) < Group 4 (Enamel Vs Overglazed ceramic disc 0.0451 ± 0.01). Conclusion:PEEK showed the least amount of enamel wear followed by Fiber reinforced composite. Fiber reinforced composite may cause less wear than dental ceramics. Enamel wear produced by polished metal ceramic disc  is substantially less than autoglazed and over glazed metal ceramic disc. This study indicates that any potential damage to ceramic can directly affect enamel and suggests that porcelain should be polished instead of over glazed. \nKey Words: Fiber reinforced composite, Autoglazed, Overglazed, Polished  surface, Wear, PEEK.","PeriodicalId":100856,"journal":{"name":"King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Evaluation of Wear of Enamel to Various Restorative Materials of Different Surface Finishes-An In Vitro Study\",\"authors\":\"F. Khan, Anup Vyas\",\"doi\":\"10.21276//ujds.2022.8.4.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim:The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of different surface finish of various restorative materials on the wear of opposing enamel.Objectives of the study:1.To compare the amount of enamel loss in experimental groups of various restorative materials at different intervals of masticatory cycles. 2.To compare and evaluate the most compatible finished or polished surface of the restorative material causing least enamel wear. Materials and Methods: A total of 90 samples were prepared for this study - 75 in disc form and 15 enamel antagonist and divided into 6 groups. Group 1 - Enamel vs Enamel antagonist, Group 2 - Enamel vs Fiber Reinforced Composite disc, Group 3 Enamel vs  Autoglazed metal ceramic disc , Group 4 - Enamel vs  Overglazed metal ceramic disc, Group 5 - Enamel vs Polished  metal ceramic  disc by polishing kit, and Group 6 - Enamel vs PEEK disc were fabricated. 105 extracted premolars were collected and randomly divided into six groups of 15 each and 15 for enamel antagonist. Each tooth sample was weighed before wear testing using electronic analytical balance of 0.0001 g accuracy. Occlusal surfaces of these teeth were then abraded against the substrates in a wear machine for a total of 10,000 cycles. Each tooth sample was weighed after 5000 cycles and after the total of 10,000 cycles, respectively, using the same balance. Differences in weight of tooth samples before and after wear testing were evaluated statistically using One-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s post hoc tests was used. Results:  The values obtained for overall mean percentage weight loss after 10000 rotations in increasing order is observed: Group 1 (Enamel Vs Enamel 0.0043 ± 0.00) < Group 6 (Enamel Vs PEEK disc 00.0131 ± 0.01) < Group 2 (Enamel Vs Fiber reinforced composite 0.0258 ± 0.01) < Group 5 (Enamel Vs Polished metal ceramic disc 0.0294 ± 0.00) < Group 3 (Enamel Vs Autoglazed metal ceramic disc 0.0318 ± 0.01) < Group 4 (Enamel Vs Overglazed ceramic disc 0.0451 ± 0.01). Conclusion:PEEK showed the least amount of enamel wear followed by Fiber reinforced composite. Fiber reinforced composite may cause less wear than dental ceramics. Enamel wear produced by polished metal ceramic disc  is substantially less than autoglazed and over glazed metal ceramic disc. This study indicates that any potential damage to ceramic can directly affect enamel and suggests that porcelain should be polished instead of over glazed. \\nKey Words: Fiber reinforced composite, Autoglazed, Overglazed, Polished  surface, Wear, PEEK.\",\"PeriodicalId\":100856,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21276//ujds.2022.8.4.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21276//ujds.2022.8.4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价不同修复材料的不同表面光洁度对对牙釉质磨损的影响。本研究的目的:1。比较不同修复材料的实验组在咀嚼周期不同时间间隔的牙釉质损失情况。2.比较和评估修复材料最相容的抛光或抛光表面,使牙釉质磨损最小。材料和方法:本研究共准备了90个样品,其中盘状样品75个,搪瓷拮抗剂15个,分为6组。组1 -搪瓷vs搪瓷拮抗剂,组2 -搪瓷vs纤维增强复合材料盘,组3 -搪瓷vs自动上光金属陶瓷盘,组4 -搪瓷vs超上光金属陶瓷盘,组5 -搪瓷vs抛光金属陶瓷盘,组6 -搪瓷vs PEEK盘。收集拔牙前磨牙105颗,随机分为6组,每组15颗,牙釉质拮抗剂组15颗。每个牙齿样品在使用0.0001 g精度的电子分析天平进行磨损测试之前称重。然后,这些牙齿的咬合表面在磨损机中与基板摩擦,总共进行10,000次循环。每个牙齿样本分别在5000次循环和10000次循环后使用相同的天平称重。采用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验对磨损试验前后牙齿样本的重量差异进行统计分析。结果:获得总体的意思是百分比值减肥10000旋转增加订单后观察:组1(搪瓷Vs搪瓷0.0043±0.00)<集团6(搪瓷Vs PEEK盘00.0131±0.01)<组2(搪瓷与纤维增强复合0.0258±0.01)<集团5(搪瓷和抛光金属陶瓷盘0.0294±0.00)< 3组(搪瓷Vs Autoglazed金属陶瓷盘0.0318±0.01)<集团4(搪瓷与釉陶瓷盘0.0451±0.01)。结论:PEEK对牙釉质磨损最小,纤维增强复合材料次之。纤维增强复合材料比牙科陶瓷造成的磨损更小。抛光金属陶瓷盘产生的搪瓷磨损基本上小于自动上釉和过上釉金属陶瓷盘。这项研究表明,对陶瓷的任何潜在损伤都会直接影响珐琅质,并建议对瓷器进行抛光,而不是过度上釉。关键词:纤维增强复合材料,自动上釉,过釉,抛光表面,磨损,PEEK
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Comparative Evaluation of Wear of Enamel to Various Restorative Materials of Different Surface Finishes-An In Vitro Study
Aim:The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of different surface finish of various restorative materials on the wear of opposing enamel.Objectives of the study:1.To compare the amount of enamel loss in experimental groups of various restorative materials at different intervals of masticatory cycles. 2.To compare and evaluate the most compatible finished or polished surface of the restorative material causing least enamel wear. Materials and Methods: A total of 90 samples were prepared for this study - 75 in disc form and 15 enamel antagonist and divided into 6 groups. Group 1 - Enamel vs Enamel antagonist, Group 2 - Enamel vs Fiber Reinforced Composite disc, Group 3 Enamel vs  Autoglazed metal ceramic disc , Group 4 - Enamel vs  Overglazed metal ceramic disc, Group 5 - Enamel vs Polished  metal ceramic  disc by polishing kit, and Group 6 - Enamel vs PEEK disc were fabricated. 105 extracted premolars were collected and randomly divided into six groups of 15 each and 15 for enamel antagonist. Each tooth sample was weighed before wear testing using electronic analytical balance of 0.0001 g accuracy. Occlusal surfaces of these teeth were then abraded against the substrates in a wear machine for a total of 10,000 cycles. Each tooth sample was weighed after 5000 cycles and after the total of 10,000 cycles, respectively, using the same balance. Differences in weight of tooth samples before and after wear testing were evaluated statistically using One-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s post hoc tests was used. Results:  The values obtained for overall mean percentage weight loss after 10000 rotations in increasing order is observed: Group 1 (Enamel Vs Enamel 0.0043 ± 0.00) < Group 6 (Enamel Vs PEEK disc 00.0131 ± 0.01) < Group 2 (Enamel Vs Fiber reinforced composite 0.0258 ± 0.01) < Group 5 (Enamel Vs Polished metal ceramic disc 0.0294 ± 0.00) < Group 3 (Enamel Vs Autoglazed metal ceramic disc 0.0318 ± 0.01) < Group 4 (Enamel Vs Overglazed ceramic disc 0.0451 ± 0.01). Conclusion:PEEK showed the least amount of enamel wear followed by Fiber reinforced composite. Fiber reinforced composite may cause less wear than dental ceramics. Enamel wear produced by polished metal ceramic disc  is substantially less than autoglazed and over glazed metal ceramic disc. This study indicates that any potential damage to ceramic can directly affect enamel and suggests that porcelain should be polished instead of over glazed. Key Words: Fiber reinforced composite, Autoglazed, Overglazed, Polished  surface, Wear, PEEK.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Comprehensive Review of Surface Coatings for enhancement of Anti-Microbial and Anti-Corrosive Properties of Titanium Implant Surface Unusually Large Radicular Cyst of Mandible: A Rare Case Report Revisiting “Plaque Free Zone”- Island of Peace in a Zone of Conflict: A stereomicroscopic study Misdiagnosed Case Management of Dens Invaginatus Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography- A Case Report Comparison of the Effect of Various Surface Treatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium Disilicate Ceramic with Dentin- An In-vitro Study
×
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