Cargando…

Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study

AIM: To compare and evaluate the surface characteristics of different restorative materials used for restoration of cervical defects when subjected to periodontal prophylactic instrumentation techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: Sixty box-shaped cavities were prepared on the labial surface of deco...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bajpai, Gauravi, Gupta, Sachin, Nikhil, Vineeta, Jaiswal, Shikha, Raj, Shalya, Mishra, Preeti
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8717842/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35035146
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd_29_21
_version_ 1784624603194195968
author Bajpai, Gauravi
Gupta, Sachin
Nikhil, Vineeta
Jaiswal, Shikha
Raj, Shalya
Mishra, Preeti
author_facet Bajpai, Gauravi
Gupta, Sachin
Nikhil, Vineeta
Jaiswal, Shikha
Raj, Shalya
Mishra, Preeti
author_sort Bajpai, Gauravi
collection PubMed
description AIM: To compare and evaluate the surface characteristics of different restorative materials used for restoration of cervical defects when subjected to periodontal prophylactic instrumentation techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: Sixty box-shaped cavities were prepared on the labial surface of decoronated permanent maxillary anterior teeth which were randomly divided into two groups (n = 30) based on the instrumentation technique Group I: Manual instrumentation using curettes and Group II: Ultrasonic instrumentation. The samples were further divided into three subgroups based on restorative material subgroups I V and II V-restored with Vitremer, subgroups I F and II F-restored with Filtek Z 250 XT and subgroups I D and II D-restored with Dyract flow, respectively. After finishing and polishing, the samples were subjected to surface profilometry analysis for determining the surface roughness values (Ra). Thereafter, the restored surfaces of all the samples in different subgroups were subjected to prophylactic instrumentation with Gracey's curettes (Group I) and ultrasonic scalers (Group II). Ra values were recorded again after prophylactic instrumentation and after polishing. The data thus obtained were subjected to the statistical analysis using the independent t-test and one-way ANOVA (p<0.05). RESULTS: Ra values were significantly higher for both manual and ultrasonic prophylaxis compared to preprophylaxis and postpolishing in all the three restorative materials. Ultrasonic scaling produced significantly higher Ra for subgroup V as compared to subgroup F and subgroup D, whereas the difference between the materials was not significant for manual scaling. CONCLUSION: Manual prophylaxis resulted in significant reduction in surface roughness of all the three restorative materials while ultrasonic prophylaxis resulted in significant reduction for Vitremer only. Polishing after scaling significantly reduced the effect of both manual and ultrasonic prophylaxis on surface roughness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8717842
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87178422022-01-14 Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study Bajpai, Gauravi Gupta, Sachin Nikhil, Vineeta Jaiswal, Shikha Raj, Shalya Mishra, Preeti J Conserv Dent Original Article AIM: To compare and evaluate the surface characteristics of different restorative materials used for restoration of cervical defects when subjected to periodontal prophylactic instrumentation techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: Sixty box-shaped cavities were prepared on the labial surface of decoronated permanent maxillary anterior teeth which were randomly divided into two groups (n = 30) based on the instrumentation technique Group I: Manual instrumentation using curettes and Group II: Ultrasonic instrumentation. The samples were further divided into three subgroups based on restorative material subgroups I V and II V-restored with Vitremer, subgroups I F and II F-restored with Filtek Z 250 XT and subgroups I D and II D-restored with Dyract flow, respectively. After finishing and polishing, the samples were subjected to surface profilometry analysis for determining the surface roughness values (Ra). Thereafter, the restored surfaces of all the samples in different subgroups were subjected to prophylactic instrumentation with Gracey's curettes (Group I) and ultrasonic scalers (Group II). Ra values were recorded again after prophylactic instrumentation and after polishing. The data thus obtained were subjected to the statistical analysis using the independent t-test and one-way ANOVA (p<0.05). RESULTS: Ra values were significantly higher for both manual and ultrasonic prophylaxis compared to preprophylaxis and postpolishing in all the three restorative materials. Ultrasonic scaling produced significantly higher Ra for subgroup V as compared to subgroup F and subgroup D, whereas the difference between the materials was not significant for manual scaling. CONCLUSION: Manual prophylaxis resulted in significant reduction in surface roughness of all the three restorative materials while ultrasonic prophylaxis resulted in significant reduction for Vitremer only. Polishing after scaling significantly reduced the effect of both manual and ultrasonic prophylaxis on surface roughness. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2021-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8717842/ /pubmed/35035146 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd_29_21 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Conservative Dentistry https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Bajpai, Gauravi
Gupta, Sachin
Nikhil, Vineeta
Jaiswal, Shikha
Raj, Shalya
Mishra, Preeti
Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title_full Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title_fullStr Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title_short Effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: An in vitro study
title_sort effect of prophylactic instrumentation on surface roughness of tooth-colored restorative material: an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8717842/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35035146
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd_29_21
work_keys_str_mv AT bajpaigauravi effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy
AT guptasachin effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy
AT nikhilvineeta effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy
AT jaiswalshikha effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy
AT rajshalya effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy
AT mishrapreeti effectofprophylacticinstrumentationonsurfaceroughnessoftoothcoloredrestorativematerialaninvitrostudy