Evaluation of the Effect of Beverages on Wear Resistance and Microleakage of Class V Esthetic Restorations

Mahmoud, Essraa A.; Niazy, Maha A; El Yasaky, Mohamed A

doi:10.21608/adjg.2018.19962

Evaluation of the Effect of Beverages on Wear Resistance and Microleakage of Class V Esthetic Restorations

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine Cairo University

² Professor of Operative Dentistry & Head of the Operative Department, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University (Girls branch).

³ Professor of Operative Dentistry & Dean of the Faculty of Dental Medicine, Sinai University

10.21608/adjg.2018.19962

Abstract

Aim: This study was carried out to evaluate the effect of beverages (orange juice and cola) on the wear resistance and microleakage of: Self cure Glass Ionomer, Flowable bulk fill composite and Packable bulk fill composite. Materials and Methods: Class V cavities were preparered on both the buccal and lingual sides, so a total of ninety cavities were created. Teeth were divided into three main groups according to the material used (30specimens each) (A). the first group was restored with the Riva self-cure glass ionomer (A1), the second group was restored by using flowalble bulk fill SDR, Dentsply (A2), while the third group was restored with packable bulk fill composite resin Filtek p 60 (A3). All Each group was further subdivided into three subgroups (Ten specimens each) (B). The specimens of the first subgroup were immersed in an orange juice for 5 minutes, 3x/day over a period of seven days and kept in artificial saliva between erosive cycles (B1). The specimens of the second subgroup were immersed in an acidic cola drink for 5 minutes, 3x/day over a period of seven days and kept in artificial saliva between erosive cycles (B2). The specimens of the third subgroup were immersed in a saline solution for 5 minutes, 3x/day over a period of seven days and kept in artificial saliva between erosive cycles to be used as control (B3). All specimens were thermocycled (5,00 cycles, 5°C-55°C). Results: Regardless to beverage media, it was found that Flowable bulk-fil composite (A2) group had the highest surface profile mean value followed by Packable bulk-fil composite (A3) group meanwhile Selfcure GI (A1) group had the lowest surface profile mean value. Also, irrespective of the material type, totally it was found that Cola (B2) immersed group recorded the highest surface profile mean values followed by Orange juice (B1) immersed group while Saline (B3) immersed group recorded the lowest surface profile mean value. So, it was found that the flowable composite had the highest surface profile roughness, and also the cola had the highest effect on all materials. Regardless to beverage media, totally it was found that Selfcure GI (A1) had the highest leakage score mean value followed by Packablebulk-fil composite (A3) group meanwhile Flowable bulk-fil composite (A2) group had the lowest leakage score mean. Meanwhile irrespective of the material type, it was found that Orange juice (A1) immersed group had the highest leakage score mean values followed by Cola (A2) immersed group while Saline (A3) immersed group had the lowest leakage score mean value.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Operative Dentistry

References

1.Voronets J and Lussi A. Thickness of softened human enamel removed by toothbrush abrasion: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Invest 2010; 14:251-256.
2.West NX, Maxwell A, Hughes JA, Parker DM, Newcombe RG and Addy M. A method to measure clinical erosion: The effect of orange juice consumption on erosion of enamel. J Dent. 1998; 26:329–335.
3.Lussi A and Jaeggi T. Chemical Factors. Mon Oral Sci 2006; 20:77-87.
4.Meurman JH, Rytomaa I, Kari K, Laakso T and Murtomaa H. Salivary pH and glucose after consuming various beverages, including sugar-containing drinks. Caries Res 1987; 21:353-359.
5.Tyas MJ. The class V lesion: aetiology and restoration. Poggio C, Chiesa M, Dagna A, Colombo M and Scribante A. Surface roughness of flowable resin composites eroded by acidic and alcoholic drinks. J Conserv Dent 2012 15:137-40.
6.Poggio C, Chiesa M, Dagna A, Colombo M and Scribante A. Microleakage in class V gingiva-shaded composite resin restorations. Ann Stomatol (Roma) 2012; 3: 19–23.
7.Martins LR. Marginal adaptation of class V composite restorations submitted to thermal and mechanical cycling, J. Appl. Oral Sci. 2013; 21:18-24
8.Xu X and Burgess JO. Compressive strength, fluoride release and recharge of fluoride-releasing materials. Biomaterials 2003; 24:2451-2461.
9.Visser HJ, Brandt PD and de Wet FA. Fracture strength of cuspreplacing fibre-strengthened composite restorations. S. Afr. dent. j. 2014; 69:380-392.
10.Francisconi LF, Honório HM, Rios D, Magalhães AC, Machado MA and Buzalaf MA. Effect of erosive pH cycling on different restorative materials and on enamel restored with these materials. Operative Dentistry 2008; 33:203-208.
11.Bagheri M and Ghavamnasiri M. Effect of cavosurface margin configuration of Class V cavity preparations on microleakage of composite resin restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008; 9:122-129.
12.Bajwa NK and Pathak A. Change in Surface Roughness of Esthetic Restorative Materials after Exposure to Different Immersion Regimes in a Cola Drink. ISRN Dentistry 2014: 6:188-201.

13.Abouelatta O. 3D Surface Roughness Measurement Using a Light Sectioning Vision System. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2010; 1:23-34.
14.Horcas I, Fernández R, Gómez-Rodríguez J, Colchero J, GómezHerrero J and Baro A. Review of Scientific Instruments 2007; 78:289-298.
15.Kakaboura A, Fragouli M, Rahiotis C and Silikas N. Evaluation of surface characteristics of dental composites using profilometry, scanning electron, atomic force microscopy and gloss-meter. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2007; 18:155-63.
16.Souza E, Pappen F, Shemesh H, Estrela C and Filh I. Reliability of assessing dye penetration along root canal fillings using methylene blue. Aust Endod J 2009; 2:1747-4477.
17.AL-Azzawi H, AL-Hyali N and Al-Dabbagh F. Microleakage of class II packable resin composite lined with flowable composite and resin modified glass ionomer cement. J Bagh College Dentistry 2012; 24:65-76.
18.Santos GB, Alto RV, Filho HR, da Silva EM and Fellows CE. Light transmission on dental resin composites. Dent Mater 2008 May; 24:571-576.
19.Silva M, Fardin A, Vasconcellos R, Santos L, Tonholo J, Júnior J and Reis J. Analysis of Roughness and Surface Hardness of a Dental Composite Using Atomic Force Microscopy and Microhardness Testing. Microscopy and Microanalysis 2011; 17:446-451.
20.Maganur, Prabha Devi C. Prabhakar, A. R. Sugandhan, S.Namineni, and Srinivas. Evaluation of microleakage of RMGIC and flowable composite immersed in soft drink and fresh fruit juice. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010; 3:153-161.
21.Mali P, Deshpande S and Singh A. Microleakage of restorative materials: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006; 24:15-8.
22.Dinakaran S. Evaluation of the effect of different food media on the marginal integrity of Class V compomer, conventional and resinmodified glass-ionomer restorations: An in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2015; 7:53-58.
23.Fukazawa M, Matsuya S and Yamane M. Mechanism for erosion of glass ionomer cements in an acidic buffer solution. J Dent Res. 1987; 66:1770–1774.
24.Erdemir U, Yildiz E, Eren MM and Ozel S. Surface hardness of different restorative materials after long-term immersion in sports and energy drinks. Dent Mater J. 2012; 31:729–36.
25.Maganur P, Prabhakar A, Satish V, Namineni S, Kurthukoti A. Erosive Effect of Soft Drink and Fresh Fruit Juice on Restorative Materials. World Journal of Dentistry, January-March 2013; 4:32-40.
26.Bamisea CT, Kolawolb KA and Oloyedec EO. The Determinants and Control of Soft Drinks-Incited Dental Erosion. Clín. Pesq. Odontol 2009; 5:141-154.
27.Vanga V. Narsimha. Effect of Cola on Surface Microhardness and Marginal Integrity of Resin Modified Glass Ionomer and Compomer Restoration. People’s Journal of Scientific Research 2011; 4:34-40.
28.Steffen JM. The effects of soft drinks on etched and sealed enamel. The Angle Orthodontist 1996; 66:449- 456.
29.Sooraparaju SG, Kanumuru PK, Nujella SK, Konda KR, Reddy KB, Penigalapati S. A comparative evaluation of microleakage in class v composite restorations. Int J Dent. 2014; 2:66-72.
30.Moezyzadeh M. and Kazemipoor M. Effect of Different Placement Techniques on Microleakage of Class V Composite Restorations. Journal of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2009; 6:121-129