Effect of surface sealant on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of bulk-fill composites

2021 ◽  
pp. 096739112110055
Author(s):  
Gunce Ozan ◽  
Meltem Mert Eren ◽  
Cansu Vatansever ◽  
Ugur Erdemir
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Bacterial Adhesion ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
High Caries Risk ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Surface Sealants ◽  
Surface Sealant ◽  
Effect Of Surface

Surface sealants are reported to ensure surface smoothness and improve the surface quality of composite restorations. These sealants should also reduce the bacterial adhesion on composite surfaces however, there is not much information regarding their performance on bulk-fill composite materials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface sealant application on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of various restorative materials. Disc-shaped samples were prepared from a compomer, a conventional composite and three bulk-fill composites. Specimens of each group were divided into two groups (n = 9): with/without surface sealant (Biscover LV, [BLV]). Surface roughness values were examined by profilometry and two samples of each group were examined for bacterial adhesion on a confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). Bacterial counts were calculated by both broth cultivation and microscopic images. Results were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni/Dunn tests. Following the BLV application, there was a decrease in the surface roughness values of all groups however, only Tetric N-Ceram Bulk and Beautifil-Bulk groups showed significantly smoother surfaces (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences among material groups without BLV application. Evaluating bacterial adhesion after BLV application, conventional composite had the lowest values among all followed by the compomer group. Beautifil-Bulk had significantly the highest bacterial adhesion (p < 0.05), followed by Tetric N-Ceram Bulk group. Without BLV application, there was no significant difference among bacterial adhesion values of groups (p > 0.05). CLSM images showed cell viability in groups. Bulk-fill composites showed higher bacterial adhesion than conventional composite and compomer materials. The surface sealant was found to be highly effective in lowering bacterial adhesion, but not so superior in smoothing the surfaces of restorative materials. So, surface sealants could be used on the restorations of patients with high caries risk.

Effect of Surface Sealants and Polishing Time on Composite Surface Roughness and Microhardness

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 408-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
VC Ruschel ◽  
VS Bona ◽  
LN Baratieri ◽  
HP Maia
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Surface ◽  
Force Microscopy ◽  
Atomic Force ◽  
Surface Sealants ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Surface Sealant ◽  
Effect Of Surface

SUMMARY The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface sealants and polishing delay time on a nanohybrid resin composite roughness and microhardness. Eighty disc specimens were made with a nanohybrid resin (Esthet-X HD, Dentsply). The specimens were divided into two groups (n=40) according to polishing time: immediate, after 10 minutes; delayed, after 48 hours. Each group was subdivided into four groups (n=10), according to the surface treatment: CG, control–rubber points (Jiffy Polishers, Ultradent); PP, rubber points + surface sealant (PermaSeal, Ultradent); PF, rubber points + surface sealant (Fortify, Bisco); PB, rubber points + surface sealant (BisCover, Bisco). Surface roughness (Ra) and microhardness (50 g/15 seconds) were measured. Surface morphology was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy. The data were analyzed statistically using one-way analysis of variance and the Games-Howell post hoc test (α=0.05). PermaSeal roughness (G2) in the delayed polishing group was significantly higher (p=0.00) than that of the other groups. No difference was observed among the groups between immediate and delayed polishing (p=1.00), except for PermaSeal (p=0.00). Moreover, PermaSeal showed the lowest microhardness values (p=0.00) for immediate polishing. Microhardness was higher at delayed polishing for all the surface treatments (p=0.00) except Fortify (p=0.73). Surface smoothness similar to polishing with rubber points was achieved when surface sealants were used, except for PermaSeal surface sealant, which resulted in a less smooth resin composite surface. However, surface sealant application did not significantly improve composite resin microhardness.

scholarly journals The Effects of Surface Roughness of Composite Resin on Biofilm Formation of Streptococcus mutans in the Presence of Saliva

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 532-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
JW Park ◽  
CW Song ◽  
JH Jung ◽  
SJ Ahn ◽  
JL Ferracane
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Silicon Carbide ◽  
Streptococcus Mutans ◽  
Biofilm Formation ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Fluid Phase ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Carbohydrate Source ◽  
Effect Of Surface

SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of surface roughness of resin composite on biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans in the presence of saliva. To provide uniform surface roughness on composites, disks were prepared by curing composite against 400-grit silicon carbide paper (SR400), 800-grit silicon carbide paper (SR800), or a glass slide (SRGlass). The surface roughness was examined using confocal laser microscopy. For biofilm formation, S. mutans was grown for 24 hours with each disk in a biofilm medium with either glucose or sucrose in the presence of fluid-phase or surface-adsorbed saliva. The adherent bacteria were quantified via enumeration of the total viable counts of bacteria. Biofilms were examined using scanning electron microscopy. This study showed that SR400 had deeper and larger, but fewer depressions than SR800. Compared to SRGlass and SR800, biofilm formation was significantly increased on SR400. In addition, the differences in the effect of surface roughness on the amount of biofilm formation were not significantly influenced by either the presence of saliva or the carbohydrate source. Considering that similar differences in surface roughness were observed between SR400 and SR800 and between SR800 and SRGlass, this study suggests that surface topography (size and depth of depressions) may play a more important role than surface roughness in biofilm formation of S. mutans.

scholarly journals Influence of Light-curing Parameters on Biofilm Development and Flexural Strength of a Silorane-based Composite

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Brambilla ◽  
A Ionescu ◽  
G Cazzaniga ◽  
M Ottobelli
Keyword(s):  
Flexural Strength ◽  
Laser Scanning ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Laser Scanning Microscopy ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Curing Time ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Biofilm Development

SUMMARYObjectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in biological and mechanical performances of a silorane-based and a methacrylate-based composite. Another aim was to assess the influence of light-curing time and light-curing intensity on in vitro biofilm formation and flexural strength of the two tested composites.Methods: Experiment 1: 432 specimens obtained from a silorane-based composite and from a standard methacrylate-based composite were divided into six groups and light-cured for 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, or 80 seconds, using one of two light-curing intensities, 400 mW/cm2 or 800 mW/cm2. At 24 hours, a monospecific Streptococcus mutans biofilm adherent to the surfaces of the samples was obtained. Then, a colorimetric technique (MTT assay) was used to evaluate the adherent viable biomass. Two samples per group were observed using confocal laser scanning microscopy. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests were used to analyze the results (p&lt;0.05). Experiment 2: 192 bar-shaped specimens were obtained and light-cured as in the previous experiment. A three-point bend test using a universal testing machine was performed to obtain flexural strength values. ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to analyze the results (p&lt;0.05).Results: In experiment 1, a highly significant difference (p&lt;0.0001) in biofilm development was shown between silorane-based and methacrylate-based composites. In fact, the silorane-based composite exhibited better biological performance. Significant differences were also found between the two light-curing intensities (p&lt;0.018) and for curing times (p&lt;0.0001): silorane-based composite light-cured for 80 seconds at 800 mW/cm2 light-curing intensity showed the lowest biofilm development. In experiment 2, a significant difference in flexural strength (p&lt;0.0318) was only found between the different composites. Nevertheless, both resin composites showed flexural strength values in accordance with International Organization for Standardization guidelines even after 10 seconds of light-curing time.Conclusions: Silorane-based composite was less prone to biofilm development compared with a methacrylate-based composite. Acceptable flexural strength values for both composites were obtained after 10 seconds of light-curing time.

scholarly journals Effect of Surface Sealant on the Surface Roughness of Different Composites and Evaluation of Their Microhardness

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Özge Gürbüz ◽  
Alev Özsoy ◽  
Benin Dikmen ◽  
Meltem Mert Eren ◽  
Aylin Çilingir
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Sealant ◽  
Effect Of Surface

scholarly journals Influence of Remineralizing Dentifrice in the Treatment of Erosive Enamel Lesions

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 238
Author(s):  
Júlia Bazaga Ferreira ◽  
Gabriella Rodovalho Paiva ◽  
Vinícius Rangel Geraldo-Martins ◽  
Juliana Jendiroba Faraoni ◽  
Regina Guenka Palma Dibb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Laser Scanning ◽  
Tooth Enamel ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Positive Control ◽  
Laser Scanning Microscopy ◽  
Confocal Laser ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Kolmogorov Smirnov

O objetivo deste trabalho in vitro foi avaliar a influência de diferentes agentes remineralizantes no tratamento de lesões erosivas em esmalte. Foram confeccionados espécimes de 4mmx4mm e 3 mm de espessura a partir da superfície vestibular de incisivos bovinos (n=10) e divididos aleatoriamente em 4 grupos. G1=aplicação do dentifrício remineralizante, G2= aplicação do agente potencializador remineralizante, G3= dentifrício remineralizante + agente potencializador remineralizante, G4=aplicação de verniz fluoretado (controle positivo), G5=nenhum tratamento (controle negativo). Os espécimes foram imersos em refrigerante durante um período de 10 dias. A rugosidade superficial foi analisada por meio de microscopia confocal de varredura a laser. Os dados foram analisados quanto à homogeneidade (Levene’s) e normalidade (Kolmogorov- Smirnov). Foram realizados testes paramétricos com análise de variância a dois critérios: fator tempo e fator tratamento, e pós-teste de Tukey para diferenciação das médias. Todos os testes estatísticos tiveram nível de significância de 5% (α=0,05). Os resultados obtidos mostraram diferenças estatisticamente significantes, demonstrando a redução da rugosidade da superfície do esmalte logo após o primeiro tratamento (G3) e para os demais grupos (G1, G2 e G4) somente após o segundo tratamento. Concluiu-se que a utilização de dentifrício composto por silicato de cálcio e fosfato de sódio influenciou na rugosidade do esmalte erodido do dente bovino.Palavras-chave: Dentifrícios. Erosão Dentária. Esmalte Dentário.Abstract The objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of different remineralizing agents in the treatment of enamel erosive lesions. Specimens of 4mmx4mm and 3mm thickness were made from the buccal surface of bovine incisors (n=10) and randomly divided into 4 groups. G1 = application of the remineralizing dentifrice, G2 = application of the remineralizing agent, G3 = remineralizing dentifrice + remineralizing agente, G4 = application of fluoride varnish (positive control), G5 = no treatment Specimens were immersed in refrigerant solution during a period of 10 days. The surface roughness was analyzed by means of confocal laser scanning microscopy. The data were analyzed for homogeneity (Levene's) and normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov). Parametric tests with analysis of variance were performed on two criteria: time factor and treatment factor, and Tukey post-test for differentiation of means. All tests were statistically significant at 5% (α = 0.05). The results showed statistically significant difference, demonstrating the reduction of surface roughness after the first treatment (G3) and the other groups (G1, G2 and G4) only after the second treatment. It was concluded that the use of dentifrice composed of calcium silicate and sodium phosphate influenced the roughness of the eroded tooth enamel of the bovine tooth.Keywords: Dentifrices. Tooth Erosion. Tooth Enamel.

Effect of Surface Roughness on Matching Properties between Ceramic Framework and Coating-Glass for Dental Applications

2007 ◽  
Vol 336-338 ◽  
pp. 1603-1605
Author(s):  
Ji Hua Chen ◽  
Bin Zhang ◽  
Zhi Hao Jin ◽  
Ji Qiang Gao ◽  
San Jun Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Ceramic Substrate ◽  
Favorable Effect ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Matching Procedure ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anchoring Strength ◽  
Dental Applications ◽  
Effect Of Surface

This study was conducted to evaluate the influence of surface roughness on anchoring strength between ceramic and coating glass. Commercial Vita alpha glass-ceramic was selected as the coating glass, while the zirconia/alumina (Z/A) composite as the substrate. Anchoring strength between substrate and coating-glass was tested, and microstructure of the junction was also observed. From the experiments we can find the following results. There was significant difference in the mean strength of different surface roughness groups and HF acid-etching also had a favorable effect on matching properties. The highest amount of anchoring strength was occurred at the high scope of roughness after HF acid-etching and surface roughness will also affect the microstructure of the junction. Therefore, we can draw the conclusions that with the limit of this research, roughness will influence matching properties between ceramic substrate and coating-glass, while hydrofluoric acid etching was also suggested in the matching procedure. Testing matching properties between ceramic substrate and coating-glass should consider the influence of surface roughness.

scholarly journals How a 16% Carbamide Peroxide Home Bleaching Agent Affects the Surface Properties of Chairside CAD/CAM Materials?

2021 ◽  
pp. 342-353
Author(s):  
Tugba Serin-Kalay ◽  
Beyza Zaim
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Surface Analysis ◽  
Lithium Silicate ◽  
Bleaching Agent ◽  
Carbamide Peroxide ◽  
Peroxide Bleaching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Computer Aided ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Cad Cam

Surface changes of restorative materials after bleaching have clinical importance in terms of the durability and survival of restorations. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of home bleaching on the surface roughness, microhardness, and surface analysis of four different types of chairside computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials. Specimens were prepared from composite resin (Brilliant Crios: BC), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate: LU), polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network (Vita Enamic: VE), and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic (Vita Suprinity: VS) CAD/CAM materials. Specimens were polished using 800, 1000, 1200, and 2000 grit SiC papers. Each restorative material was randomly divided into two groups; control and bleaching (n=10). The 16% carbamide peroxide bleaching agent (Whiteness Perfect 16%, FGM) was applied to the specimens for 4 h/day for 14 days. Surface roughness values (Ra) were obtained using a profilometer, and microhardness values (VHN) were obtained using a Vickers microhardness test. Surface analysis of specimens was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). Data were analyzed Two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test (p<0.05). After bleaching, the surface roughness of BC (p<0.001) and VE (p<0.032) significantly increased. Bleaching did not significantly affect the microhardness of CAD/CAM materials. SEM evaluation showed material-dependent surface damages after bleaching procedures. The effect of 16% carbamide peroxide home bleaching agent on surface roughness and microhardness of chairside CAD/CAM materials is material-dependent. Before bleaching, restorative materials should be protected by applying a protective barrier and contact with the bleaching agent should be minimized. Also, after bleaching, the restoration surface should be carefully inspected, and re-polishing might be beneficial.

scholarly journals Study the effect of surface sealant on microleakage in class V cavities filled by different restorative materials

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-156
Author(s):  
Niaz H. Ghareeb H.Saeed ◽  
◽  
Gollshang Ahmad Mhammed ◽  
Hawzheen Masoud Mohamad ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class V ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Surface Sealant ◽  
Effect Of Surface
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document