In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth

Marcia Regina Bernardi Da Cunha, Regina Maria Puppin-Rontani, Jack Ferracane, Lourenço Correr-Sobrinho

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of dental materials on primary enamel wear. Methods: Four composites (Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4, SureFil), two compomers (Dyract AP, F2000) and a resin-modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer) were placed into box-shaped preparations in buccal surfaces of primary molars and stored for 24 hours in water at 37°C. The specimens (n = 6) were subjected to abrasive three-body wear against a primary enamel cusp. Material wear, enamel wear (adjacent to the material), and wear on enamel cusps were estimated by profilometry and video-analysis software. Results were compared with ANOVA and Tukey's tests (P<0.05). Results: Vitremer showed the highest wear (P<0.05), followed by Dyract AP and F2000, which were not statistically different (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between Filtek Z250 and Dyract AP (P> 0.05). Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4 and SureFil, showed the lowest wear values and there was no difference among them (P> 0.05). The highest wear values on the enamel adjacent to the material were found with Dyract AP (P<0.05) and the lowest next to Point 4 and SureFil (P<0.05). There was no difference in the wear of the enamel next to Vitremer, F2000, Heliomolar and Filtek Z250 (P> 0.05). Vitremer and F2000 caused the highest wear on enamel cusps (P<0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference (P> 0.05) between them; SureFil caused the lowest wear (P<0.05) on the opposing enamel. There was a correlation (r= 0.85) between wear of materials and wear on the enamel cusps, but not (r= 0.53) for the wear on enamel besides the restoration and wear on enamel cusps. SEM micrographs showed different surface characteristics of the materials after the wear test.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)364-369
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Dentistry
Volume19
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 2006

Fingerprint

Dental Materials
Deciduous Tooth
Dental Enamel
In Vitro Techniques
Cheek
Analysis of Variance
Software

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Da Cunha, M. R. B., Puppin-Rontani, R. M., Ferracane, J., & Correr-Sobrinho, L. (2006). In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth. American Journal of Dentistry, 19(6), 364-369.

In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth. / Da Cunha, Marcia Regina Bernardi; Puppin-Rontani, Regina Maria; Ferracane, Jack; Correr-Sobrinho, Lourenço.

In: American Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 19, No. 6, 12.2006, p. 364-369.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Da Cunha, MRB, Puppin-Rontani, RM, Ferracane, J & Correr-Sobrinho, L 2006, 'In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth', American Journal of Dentistry, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 364-369.
Da Cunha MRB, Puppin-Rontani RM, Ferracane J, Correr-Sobrinho L. In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth. American Journal of Dentistry. 2006 Dec;19(6):364-369.
Da Cunha, Marcia Regina Bernardi ; Puppin-Rontani, Regina Maria ; Ferracane, Jack ; Correr-Sobrinho, Lourenço. / In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth. In: American Journal of Dentistry. 2006 ; Vol. 19, No. 6. pp. 364-369.
@article{d9b6952370b641b783a232604a5d93e5,
title = "In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate the effect of dental materials on primary enamel wear. Methods: Four composites (Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4, SureFil), two compomers (Dyract AP, F2000) and a resin-modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer) were placed into box-shaped preparations in buccal surfaces of primary molars and stored for 24 hours in water at 37°C. The specimens (n = 6) were subjected to abrasive three-body wear against a primary enamel cusp. Material wear, enamel wear (adjacent to the material), and wear on enamel cusps were estimated by profilometry and video-analysis software. Results were compared with ANOVA and Tukey's tests (P<0.05). Results: Vitremer showed the highest wear (P<0.05), followed by Dyract AP and F2000, which were not statistically different (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between Filtek Z250 and Dyract AP (P> 0.05). Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4 and SureFil, showed the lowest wear values and there was no difference among them (P> 0.05). The highest wear values on the enamel adjacent to the material were found with Dyract AP (P<0.05) and the lowest next to Point 4 and SureFil (P<0.05). There was no difference in the wear of the enamel next to Vitremer, F2000, Heliomolar and Filtek Z250 (P> 0.05). Vitremer and F2000 caused the highest wear on enamel cusps (P<0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference (P> 0.05) between them; SureFil caused the lowest wear (P<0.05) on the opposing enamel. There was a correlation (r= 0.85) between wear of materials and wear on the enamel cusps, but not (r= 0.53) for the wear on enamel besides the restoration and wear on enamel cusps. SEM micrographs showed different surface characteristics of the materials after the wear test.",
author = "{Da Cunha}, {Marcia Regina Bernardi} and Puppin-Rontani, {Regina Maria} and Jack Ferracane and Louren{\cc}o Correr-Sobrinho",
year = "2006",
month = "12",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "364--369",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In vitro wear evaluation of dental materials in primary teeth

AU - Da Cunha, Marcia Regina Bernardi

AU - Puppin-Rontani, Regina Maria

AU - Ferracane, Jack

AU - Correr-Sobrinho, Lourenço

PY - 2006/12

Y1 - 2006/12

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate the effect of dental materials on primary enamel wear. Methods: Four composites (Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4, SureFil), two compomers (Dyract AP, F2000) and a resin-modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer) were placed into box-shaped preparations in buccal surfaces of primary molars and stored for 24 hours in water at 37°C. The specimens (n = 6) were subjected to abrasive three-body wear against a primary enamel cusp. Material wear, enamel wear (adjacent to the material), and wear on enamel cusps were estimated by profilometry and video-analysis software. Results were compared with ANOVA and Tukey's tests (P<0.05). Results: Vitremer showed the highest wear (P<0.05), followed by Dyract AP and F2000, which were not statistically different (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between Filtek Z250 and Dyract AP (P> 0.05). Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4 and SureFil, showed the lowest wear values and there was no difference among them (P> 0.05). The highest wear values on the enamel adjacent to the material were found with Dyract AP (P<0.05) and the lowest next to Point 4 and SureFil (P<0.05). There was no difference in the wear of the enamel next to Vitremer, F2000, Heliomolar and Filtek Z250 (P> 0.05). Vitremer and F2000 caused the highest wear on enamel cusps (P<0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference (P> 0.05) between them; SureFil caused the lowest wear (P<0.05) on the opposing enamel. There was a correlation (r= 0.85) between wear of materials and wear on the enamel cusps, but not (r= 0.53) for the wear on enamel besides the restoration and wear on enamel cusps. SEM micrographs showed different surface characteristics of the materials after the wear test.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate the effect of dental materials on primary enamel wear. Methods: Four composites (Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4, SureFil), two compomers (Dyract AP, F2000) and a resin-modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer) were placed into box-shaped preparations in buccal surfaces of primary molars and stored for 24 hours in water at 37°C. The specimens (n = 6) were subjected to abrasive three-body wear against a primary enamel cusp. Material wear, enamel wear (adjacent to the material), and wear on enamel cusps were estimated by profilometry and video-analysis software. Results were compared with ANOVA and Tukey's tests (P<0.05). Results: Vitremer showed the highest wear (P<0.05), followed by Dyract AP and F2000, which were not statistically different (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference between Filtek Z250 and Dyract AP (P> 0.05). Filtek Z250, Heliomolar, Point 4 and SureFil, showed the lowest wear values and there was no difference among them (P> 0.05). The highest wear values on the enamel adjacent to the material were found with Dyract AP (P<0.05) and the lowest next to Point 4 and SureFil (P<0.05). There was no difference in the wear of the enamel next to Vitremer, F2000, Heliomolar and Filtek Z250 (P> 0.05). Vitremer and F2000 caused the highest wear on enamel cusps (P<0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference (P> 0.05) between them; SureFil caused the lowest wear (P<0.05) on the opposing enamel. There was a correlation (r= 0.85) between wear of materials and wear on the enamel cusps, but not (r= 0.53) for the wear on enamel besides the restoration and wear on enamel cusps. SEM micrographs showed different surface characteristics of the materials after the wear test.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33846166723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33846166723&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 364

EP - 369

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 6

ER -