17Jun 2019

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF SALIVA SUBSTITUTE ON THE MICROHARDNESS OF THREE DIFFERENT DIRECT TOOTH COLOURED RESTORATIVE MATERIALS: AN IN VITRO STUDY.

  • Post graduate student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Mahatama Gandhi Mission?s Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics,Mahatama Gandhi Mission?s Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
  • Professor and Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics,Mahatama Gandhi Mission?s Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Crossref Cited-by Linking logo

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

Context: In patients usingsaliva substitute (SS) which would be a suitable aesthetic restorative material. Aims: To evaluate and compare the effect of saliva substitute on the microhardness of direct tooth coloured restorative materials. Settings and Design:This is an in vitro study for evaluation of Vickers microhardness (VM) where standard uniform disc‑shaped specimens were immersed in a saliva substitute (SS) for 30 days. Methods and Material: The tooth‑colored restorative materials tested in this study were Group I- resin modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC), Group II-light cured fluoride releasing restorative material (Ketac N100) and Group III-light cured resin composite restorative material (Filtek Z 350 XT).Forty‑eight disc‑shaped samples, 16 of each material were prepared. Samples belonging to respective groups were randomly divided into two subgroups with 8 samples each. Subgroup A was immersed in distilled water (DW) and subgroup B in saliva substitute (SS). In addition 3 samples of group I, II and III were prepared for scanning electron microscopic examination. VM value were calculated from the table of ISO 6507 standard. Pre and post-immersion microhardness measurements were made on the same surface of all samples. Statistical Analysis Used: Normality of data obtained was tested using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk test, then parametric tests were used to compare the means between different groups. The level of significance was set at 5% and the p values less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: All the restorative materials when immersed in SS showed statistically significant reduction (p<0.05) in microhardness. When the restorative materials were immersed in DW there was no substantial reduction in microhardness. Light cured resin composite restorative material (Filtek Z350 XT) showed the least reduction in microhardness followed by RMGIC and Ketac N 100. Conclusion: Among the materials tested Light cured resin composite restorative material showed maximum microhardness before and after immersion in DW and SS.

  1. Meyer-Lueckel H , Tschoppe P, Kielbassa A M. Linseed based saliva substitutes and their effect on mineral dissolution of predemineralized bovine dentin in vitro. J Dent 2006;34:751-756.
  2. Miljković N, Dačić S,? Karuntanović T, Igić M,? Dačić M, Simonović D. The Influence of Different Light Curing Modes on the Depth of Cure of the Composite Resin. Oper dent 2008;33(4):408-412
  3. Gharatkar A A , Irani R , Shiraguppi V , Hegde V. Effect of cola, orange juice, and wine on surface micro-hardness of nano-composites: An in vitro J Dent Orofac Res. 2014;10(1):16-20.
  4. Yanikoğlu N, Duymuş Y Z and Yilmaz B. Effect of different solutions on the surface hardness of composite resin materials. Dental Materials Journal 2009;28(3):344-351
  5. Kooi TJ, Tan QZ, Yap AU, Guo W, Tay KJ, Soh MS. Effects of food-simulating liquids on surface properties of giomer restoratives. Oper Dent. 2012;37(6):665-71.
  6. Samarawickrama DY. Saliva substitutes: how effective and safe are they? Oral
  7. 2002;8:177?179.
  8. Van der Reijden WA, van der Kwaak JS, Veerman ECI, Nieuw Amerongen AV.
  9. Analysis of the concentration and output of whole saliavary constituents in patients
  10. with Sjogren?s syndrome. Eur J Oral Sci. 1996;104:335?340.
  11. Kang M, Park H, Jun J, Son M, Kang M J. Facilitated saliva secretion and reduced
  12. oral inflammation by a novel artificial saliva system in the treatment of salivary
  13. Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2017;11: 185?191
  14. Pedersen AM, Bardow A, Jensen SB, Nauntofte B. Saliva and gastrointestinal functions of taste, mastication, swallowing and digestion. Oral Dis. 2002;8:117?129
  15. Hu JY, Chen XC, Li YQ, Smales RJ, Yip KH. Radiation induced root surface caries restored with glass ionomer cement placed in conventional and ART cavity preparations: Results at two years. Australian Dental Journal 2005; 50(3):186-190.
  16. Levine MJ. Development of artificial salivas. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1993;4:279?286.
  17. Voltarelli F R , Daroz C B , Alves M C, Peris A R , Marchi G M. Effect of different light curing devices and aging procedures on composite knoop microhardness Braz Oral Res 2009;239(4):473-479
  18. Badra VV, Faraoni JJ, Ramos RP, Palma-Dibb RG. Influence of different beverages on the microhardness and surface roughness of composite resins. Oper Dent. 2005;30:213-9.
  19. Uhl A, Mills RW, Jandt KD. Photoinitiator dependent composite depth of cure and Knoop hardness with halogen and LED light curing units. Biomaterials. 2003;24:1787-95.
  20. Margasahayam S V, Walzade P S, Shenoy V U Comparative evaluation of the effect of a saliva substitute on the color stability of three different direct tooth-colored restorative materials: An in vitro spectrophotometric study. Indian J Dent Sci 2018;10(3):127-132
  21. Mayworm C D, Camargo S S, Bastian F L. Influence of artificial saliva on abrasive wear and microhardness of dental composites filled with nanoparticles. Journal of Dentistry 2008 36(9):703-10
  22. Nair S R, Niranjan N T, Jayasheel A, Suryakanth D B. Comparative Evaluation of Colour Stability and Surface Hardness of Methacrylate Based Flowable and Packable Composite -In vitro Study. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 2017; 11(3): 51-54.
  23. Somayaji S K, Amalan A, Ginjupalli K. Effect of Different Acidic Beverages on Microhardness of Nanohybrid Composite, Giomer, and Microhybrid Composite. World Journal of Dentistry 2016; 7(3):126-128.
  24. Solomon R V, Byragoni C, Jain A, Juvvadi Y, Babu R. An in vitro evaluation of microhardness of different direct resin‑based restorative materials on using 10% carbamide peroxide gel as a bleaching agent. Journal of Oral Research and Review 2016; 8(2):59-65.
  25. Aguiar FH, Lazzari CR, Lima DA, Ambrosano GM, Lovadino JR. Effect of light curing tip distance and resin shade on microhardness of a hybrid resin composite. Braz Oral Res. 2005;19(4):302-6.
  26. com/distilled-good-control-science-projects-7418493.html
  27. Zuryati, A G, Qian, O Q, & Dasmawati, M. Effects of home bleaching on surface hardness and surface roughness of an experimental nanocomposite. Journal of Conservative Dentistry : JCD 2013; 16(4):356?361.
  28. Lombardini M, Chiesa M, Scribante A, Colombo M, and Poggio C. The influence of polymerization time and depth of cure of six commercial resin composites by Vickers microhardness. Dental Research Journal 2012;9(6):735-740
  29. Sakaguchi R, Powers J. Craig\'s Restorative Dental Materials. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Inc; 2012.
  30. Zuryati, A G, Qian, O Q, & Dasmawati, M. Effects of home bleaching on surface hardness and surface roughness of an experimental nanocomposite. Journal of Conservative Dentistry : JCD 2013; 16(4):356?361.
  31. Fatima N, Abidi S Y, Qazi F R, Jat S A. Effect of different tetra pack juices on microhardness of direct tooth colored-restorative materials. The Saudi Dental Journal 2013; 25: 29?32.
  32. Sharafeddin F, Sharifi E. The effect of microwave/laboratory light source postcuring technique and wet aging on microhardness of composite resin. Dental Research Journal 2013;10(3):370-375
  33. Hashemikamangar S S, Pourhashemi S J , Kiomarsi M N, and Kharazifard M J. Effect of organic acids in dental biofilm on microhardness of a silorane-based composite Restor Dent Endod. 2015 Aug; 40(3): 188?194.
  34. Vadcharavivada S, Boonroungb T. Effects of two carboxymethylcellulose‑containing saliva substitutes on post‑radiation xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients related to quality of life. Asian Biomed 2013;7:193‑

[Pranjal Sunil Walzade, Sumanthini M V, Vanitha U Shenoy and Rohini Mahajan. (2019); COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF SALIVA SUBSTITUTE ON THE MICROHARDNESS OF THREE DIFFERENT DIRECT TOOTH COLOURED RESTORATIVE MATERIALS: AN IN VITRO STUDY. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 7 (Jun). 654-665] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Pranjal sunil Walzade
Post graduate student at MGM Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/9268      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/9268

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 36 | No. of Views: 118