Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load

Dental Materials

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 306-319

  Heintze, S D ^a   Forjanic, M ^a   Ohmiti, K ^b   Rousson, V ^b  

^a IVOCLAR VIVADENT AG   (Liechtenstein)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Load; Surface gloss; Surface roughness; Time; Toothbrushing

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDIES; COMPOGLASS; EXTERNAL CONDITIONS; FILTEK SUPREME; FLAT SPECIMEN; HIGHER LOADS; HYBRID COMPOSITES; IN-VITRO; MEAN SURFACE ROUGHNESS; SIMULATION DEVICE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRONG CORRELATION; SURFACE CHANGES; SURFACE DETERIORATION; SURFACE GLOSS; TWO-WAY ANOVA;

CERAMIC MATERIALS; COMPOSITE MICROMECHANICS; DENTAL COMPOSITES; DENTAL PROSTHESES; DETERIORATION; METAL ANALYSIS; RESINS; SILICON CARBIDE; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURFACE ROUGHNESS; SWITCHING SYSTEMS; TERBIUM ALLOYS; UNINTERRUPTIBLE POWER SYSTEMS;

HYBRID MATERIALS;

RESIN;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL SURGERY; LIGHT RELATED PHENOMENA; MATERIALS TESTING; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SURFACE PROPERTY; TIME; TOOTH BRUSHING; TOOTH PROSTHESIS;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL POLISHING; DENTAL PORCELAIN; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; MATERIALS TESTING; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; OPTICAL PHENOMENA; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TIME FACTORS; TOOTHBRUSHING;

EID: 77249096291     PISSN: 01095641     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.152     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Jones C.S., Billington R.W., and Pearson G.J. The in vivo perception of roughness of restorations. Br Dent J 196 (2004) 42-45
2. Bollen C.M., Lambrechts P., and Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dent Mater 13 (1997) 258-269
3. Reis A.F., Giannini M., Lovadino J.R., and Ambrosano G.M. Effects of various finishing systems on the surface roughness and staining susceptibility of packable composite resins. Dent Mater 19 (2003) 12-18
4. Quirynen M., Bollen C.M., Papaioannou W., Van Eldere J., and van Steenberghe D. The influence of titanium abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and gingivitis: short-term observations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 11 (1996) 169-178
5. Göhring T.N., and Roos M. Inlay-fixed partial dentures adhesively retained and reinforced by glass fibers: clinical and scanning electron microscopy analysis after five years. Eur J Oral Sci 113 (2005) 60-69
6. Freilich M.A., Meiers J.C., Duncan J.P., Eckrote K.A., and Goldberg A.J. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced fixed bridges. J Am Dent Assoc 133 (2002) 1524-1534
7. CRA. Posterior full crowns 2001. Part 2. Resin crowns, 4 years clinical status. CRA Newslett 25 (2001) 1-3
8. Lange R.T., and Pfeiffer P. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays compared to composite restorations. Oper Dent 34 (2009) 263-272
9. Manhart J., Chen H.Y., Neuerer P., Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A., and Hickel R. Three-year clinical evaluation of composite and ceramic inlays. Am J Dent 14 (2001) 95-99
10. Neme A.L., Frazier K.B., Roeder L.B., and Debner T.L. Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent 27 (2002) 50-58
11. dos Santos P.H., Consani S., Correr Sobrinho L., and Coelho Sinhoreti M.A. Effect of surface penetrating sealant on roughness of posterior composite resins. Am J Dent 16 (2003) 197-201
12. Tanoue N., Matsumura H., and Atsuta M. Wear and surface roughness of current prosthetic composites after toothbrush/dentifrice abrasion. J Prosthet Dent 84 (2000) 93-97
13. Cho L.R., Yi Y.J., and Heo S.J. Effect of tooth brushing and thermal cycling on a surface change of ceromers finished with different methods. J Oral Rehabil 29 (2002) 816-822
14. McCabe J.F., Molyvda S., Rolland S.L., Rusby S., and Carrick T.E. Two- and three-body wear of dental restorative materials. Int Dent J 52 (2002) 406-416
15. Turssi C.P., De Moraes Purquerio B., and Serra M.C. Wear of dental resin composites: insights into underlying processes and assessment methods-a review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 65 (2003) 280-285
16. Wang L., Garcia F.C., Amarante de Araujo P., Franco E.B., and Mondelli R.F. Wear resistance of packable resin composites after simulated toothbrushing test. J Esthet Restor Dent 16 (2004) 303-314
17. Heintze S.D., and Forjanic M. Roughness of different dental materials before and after simulated toothbrushing in vitro. Oper Dent 30 (2005) 617-626
18. Heintze S.D., and Forjanic M. Surface roughness and gloss of dental materials after toothbrushing simulation. J Dent Res 85 Spec Iss B (2006). http://www.dentalresearch.org/ Abstract No 472 (www.dentalresearch.org)
19. Van der Weijden G.A., Timmerman M.F., Danser M.M., and Van der Velden U. Relationship between the plaque removal efficacy of a manual toothbrush and brushing force. J Clin Periodontol 25 (1998) 413-416
20. Volpenhein D.W., Walsh M.E., Dellerman P.A., and Burkett T.A. A new method for in vitro evaluation of the interproximal penetration of manual toothbrushes. J Clin Dent 5 (1994) 27-33
21. ISO. Dental materials-guidance on testing of wear resistance. Part 1. Wear by tooth brushing. Technical Specification 1999; No. 14569-1.
22. Teixeira E.C., Thompson J.L., Piascik J.R., and Thompson J.Y. In vitro toothbrush-dentifrice abrasion of two restorative composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 17 (2005) 172-180
23. Heintze S.D., Forjanic M., and Rousson V. Surface roughness and gloss of dental materials as a function of force and polishing time in vitro. Dent Mater 22 (2006) 146-165
24. Roulet J.-F. Degradation of dental polymers (1987), Karger, Basel
25. Kanter J., Koski R.E., and Martin D. The relationship of weight loss to surface roughness of composite resins from simulated toothbrushing. J Prosthet Dent 47 (1982) 505-513
26. Willems G., Lambrechts P., Braem M., Vuylsteke-Wauters M., and Vanherle G. The surface roughness of enamel-to-enamel contact areas compared with the intrinsic roughness of dental resin composites. J Dent Res 70 (1991) 1299-1305
27. Hickel R., and Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 3 (2001) 45-64
28. Krämer N., and Frankenberger R. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays after six years: wear of luting composites. Oper Dent 25 (2000) 466-472
29. Meijering A.C., Roeter s F.J., Mulder J., and Creugers N.H. Patients' satisfaction with different types of veneer restorations. J Dent 25 (1997) 493-497
30. Meijering A.C., Creugers N.H., Roeters F.J., and Mulder J. Survival of three types of veneer restorations in a clinical trial: a 2.5-year interim evaluation. J Dent 26 (1998) 563-568
31. Peumans M., Van Meerbeek B., Lambrechts P., and Vanherle G. Porcelain veneers: a review of the literature. J Dent 28 (2000) 163-177
32. Thordrup M., Isidor F., and Hörsted-Bindslev P. A prospective clinical study of indirect and direct composite and ceramic inlays: ten-year results. Quintessence Int 37 (2006) 139-144
33. Wilson N.H., Burke F.J., and Mjör I.A. Reasons for placement and replacement of restorations of direct restorative materials by a selected group of practitioners in the United Kingdom. Quintessence Int 28 (1997) 245-248
34. Van Dijken J.W., Sjöström S., and Wing K. The effect of different types of composite resin filling materials on marginal gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 14 (1987) 185-189
35. Quirynen M., and Bollen C.M. The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature. J Clin Periodontol 22 (1995) 1-14
36. Manhart J., Chen H., Hamm G., and Hickel R. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 29 (2004) 481-508
37. Brunthaler A., König F., Lucas T., Sperr W., and Schedle A. Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 7 (2003) 63-70
38. Van Dijken J.W., and Sjöström S. Development of gingivitis around aged restorations of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) and resin composite. Clin Oral Invest 2 (1998) 180-183
39. Krämer N., Reinelt C., Richter G., Petschelt A., and Frankenberger R. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: clinical results and margin analysis after four years. Dent Mater 25 (2009) 750-759
40. Ernst C.P., Brandenbusch M., Meyer G., Canbek K., Gottschalk F., and Willershausen B. Two-year clinical performance of a nanofiller vs. a fine-particle hybrid resin composite. Clin Oral Invest 10 (2006) 119-125
41. Geitel B., Kwiatkowski R., Zimmer S., Barthel C.R., Roulet J.F., and Jahn K.R. Clinically controlled study on the quality of class III, IV and V composite restorations after two years. J Adhes Dent 6 (2004) 247-253
42. Reusens B., D'Hoore W., and Vreven J. In vivo comparison of a microfilled and a hybrid minifilled composite resin in Class III restorations: 2-year follow-up. Clin Oral Invest 3 (1999) 62-69
43. Van Dijken J.W. Resin-modified glass ionomer cement and self-cured resin composite luted ceramic inlays. A 5-year clinical evaluation. Dent Mater 19 (2003) 670-674
44. CRA. Restorative resins: current generation Class 2 resin status report #3-2-year clinical performance. CRA Newslett 20 (1996) 1-3
45. Knibbs P.J., and Smart E.R. The clinical performance of a posterior composite resin restorative material, Heliomolar RO: 3-year report. J Oral Rehabil 19 (1992) 231-237
46. Portugal J., Bernardo M.F., Pereira C., Tavares A.V., and Leitão J. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced composite bridges: two-year report. J Dent Res 85 Spec Iss B (2005). http://www.dentalresearch.org/ Abstract No 582 (Continental European and Scandinavian Divisions) (www.dentalresearch.org)