气流喷砂器对牙面色素清洁效果和粗糙度影响

目的 探讨4种气流喷砂器和超声洁治器对牙面外来色素的清洁能力和对牙面粗糙度的影响.方法 33颗离体牙分别用4种气流喷砂器(OP组:Osada Porarisu T;HC组:HandyJet C;QS组:QuickJet S;PM组:Prophy-mate T)和超声洁治器(US组:Morita)处理后,用分光色差仪和激...     

超声洁治及橡皮杯抛光对牙釉质表面的影响

目的：探讨超声洁治划过牙面次数及橡皮杯抛光时间对牙釉质表面粗糙度的影响。方法：用表面粗糙度测量仪测量80颗经超声洁治器划过不同次数后离体牙牙釉质的表面粗糙度（Ra值）,观察Ra值的变化及分析不同抛光时间对其粗糙度的影响。结果：超声洁治后离体牙釉质表面粗糙度显著增加（P〈0.05）,牙釉质表面粗糙度随超声洁治划过次数的增加而增加;进一步磨光可使牙面粗糙度显著下降（P〈0.05）,抛光2～4 s时表面粗糙度与天然牙比较无显著性差异（P〉0.05）。结论：临床上进行超声洁治术后会使牙釉质表面粗糙度增加,抛光2～4 s后表面粗糙度可降至与天然牙相近,过度抛光可使其粗糙度下降。     

洁治及抛光对釉质表面粗糙度影响的实验研究

目的:评价不同洁治及抛光方法对牙釉质表面粗糙度及形态的影响.方法:选择6 颗人离体中切牙,切除牙根.在唇面中心点将牙冠分别水平及垂直切割成4 个釉质块,制得唇面釉质块共24 个,再用自凝塑料包埋每个釉质块,打磨抛光暴露的釉面.将24 个试样均分为8 组,分别作如下处理, A组:无处理(空白对照);B组: 超声洁治;C组:超声洁治后抛光膏抛光;D组: 超声洁治后牙膏抛光;E组:超声洁治后喷砂抛光;F组:喷砂洁治;G组:喷砂洁治后抛光膏抛光;H组:喷砂洁治后牙膏抛光.之后用粗糙度仪测定釉面粗糙度, 并进行扫描电镜观察.结果:超声洁治后釉面粗糙度大幅度增加(P<0.01),经3 种方法抛光后,釉质表面粗糙度均有显著下降(P<0.05),其中牙膏抛光后粗糙度下降幅度显著大于喷砂抛光和抛光膏抛光(P<0.05).喷砂洁治后釉面粗糙度明显增加(P<0.05),进一步用抛光膏抛光使得釉面更加粗糙(P<0.05),而用牙膏抛光,虽未进一步增加粗糙度,但也未能降低釉面粗糙度(P>0.05).结论:超声洁治能使釉质表面形成凹陷性缺损,粗糙度增加,应当抛光.喷砂洁治后不必再抛光.抛光材料及方法明显影响抛光效果.     

4种喷砂砂粒对牙釉质表面粗糙度影响的对比研究

目的对比评价4种喷砂砂粒对牙体表面粗糙度的影响。方法选择因正畸需要拔除的前磨牙20颗,将本实验的4种喷砂材料分成A(30μm Al2O3)、B(120μm NaHCO3)、C(50μm NaHCO3)和D(50μm Al2O3)四组,每牙的4个面随机分到A、B、C和D四组中。实验前测量各牙表面牙釉质粗糙度值,记为Ra1。在相同的条件下进行喷砂洁治,测量记录其粗糙度为Ra2。然后对各实验牙面用橡皮杯和抛光糊剂作抛光处理,再次测量表面粗糙度,记为Ra3。结果A、B、C组Ra3与Ra1相近(P>0.05),D组Ra3明显大于Ra1(P<0.05)。四组间Ra1无明显差异(P>0.05);D组Ra2、Ra3分别明显大于A、B、C组Ra2和Ra3(与A、B比较,P<0.05;与C比较,P<0.01)。结论50μm Al2O3砂粒对牙釉质喷砂抛光处理后不能达到临床要求。     

钴铬合金铸造卡环与牙面间静摩擦系数的测定

目的　测定卡环与牙面间的静摩擦系数 ,为卡环固位力的定量计算奠定基础。方法　根据摩擦学原理 ,对临床实际情况合理地简化、模拟 ,设计一种摩擦系数的测试方法。结果　测得钴铬合金铸造卡环组织面与牙釉面间干燥状态下的静摩擦系数为 0 .2 5 4± 0 .0 16 (99%可信区间 ) ;通过比较测定 ,表明按常规制作的不同粗糙度的钴铬合金铸造卡环 ,与牙面间静摩擦系数的差异无显著性意义 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论　常规制作的钴铬合金铸造卡环与牙釉面间的静摩擦系数值变异较小。     

上颌前方牵引治疗青少年骨性反的临床研究

目的　分析上颌前方牵引矫治青春快速生长期减速阶段的安氏Ⅲ类错牙合前牙反牙合的可行性及疗效。方法　选择12例安氏Ⅲ类错牙合前牙反牙合患者,在治疗前及使用上颌前方牵引器械解除反牙合后,摄头颅侧位定位片,并进行投影测量分析。结果　覆盖增加(3.90±0 .4 0 )mm(P <0 .0 0 1) ,A点矢状方向增加(1.80±0 .37)mm(P <0 .0 5 ) ,B点矢状方向减少(0 .6 0±0 .19)mm(P <0 .0 5 ) ,Wits增加(3.10±0 .5 7)mm(P <0 .0 5 ) ,ANB增加(3.0 0±0 .5 7)°(P <0 .0 5 ) ,其中4 1%为骨性改变,5 9%为牙性代偿。结论　上颌前方牵引对于错过青春快速生长期,由上颌骨发育不足造成的安氏Ⅲ类骨性错牙合仍是有效的。     

抛光对牙面再着色的影响

目的:观察超声洁治、喷砂及磨除法去色素后,牙面抛光与否对预防牙外源性色素沉着的影响.方法:以茶水及洗必泰液制备牙外源性着色模型,以超声洁治、喷砂和磨除法去除实验牙色斑后设抛光组与对照组(n=16)并染色,记录实验前后牙面白色度值.以SAS6.12软件做方差分析,比较3种方法的去色效果、再着色程度及抛光与否对牙面着色的影响.结果:3种方法均能有效去除色斑,去色前后白色度值有显著性差异(P<0.01).再次染色后3组的白色度值之间没有显著性差异(P>0.05).牙面抛光侧与未抛光侧再染色后的白色度值有显著性差异(P﹤0.01).结论:3种方法去色后都存在牙面再着色的问题.牙面经抛光处理后外源性色素的附着明显减少,表明牙面去色处理后,抛光牙面是十分必要的.     

车针粒度对预备牙体与水门汀粘固强度的影响

目的：比较不同粒度金刚砂车针预备的牙面与聚羧酸锌水门汀的粘固强度。方法：分别采用4种不同粒度车针依次打磨4组牙本质片,测量其粗糙度,并采用扫描电镜观察;再将牙本质片与聚羧酸锌水门汀粘固,测试各组剪切强度。结果：4种粒度车针预备的牙面粗糙度间存在显著差异（P〈0.01）;聚羧酸锌水门汀与各组牙面的粘固强度间也存在显著差异（P〈0.05）。结论：随预备用车针粒度的减小,牙面粗糙度降低,聚羧酸锌水门汀与牙面的粘固强度也相应降低。     

自制磨光糊剂在临床及离体牙应用的效果

牙周洁治后选用合适的磨光糊剂磨光牙面既可去除残余色素，又可提高牙面的光洁度，从而延缓菌斑、牙石和色素的重新沉着，巩固疗效。我们对自行配制的一种磨光糊剂（粗细二型）作离体牙实验和临床疗效观察：1.24颗离体牙洁治后经自制磨光糊剂磨光用光波干涉显微镜（light wave interference microscope）观察牙面，其光洁度大大提高，可达到进口糊剂同等磨光效果。2.临床以12例龈炎患者的72颗上前牙为实验对象，洁治后一侧以自制糊剂磨光，另一侧不磨光，纵向观察8～10周，磨光侧牙面的色素沉积明显少于不磨光侧。     

Ⅱ类高角患者矫治后颅面结构变化的临床研究

目的 :探讨Ⅱ类高角患者矫治中应注意的问题。方法 :采用Tweed Merrifield骨骼测量法对 14例安氏Ⅱ类高角病例治疗前后组织改变进行头影测量分析比较。结果 :( 1)FMIA及Z角在治疗后增加并具有显著差异 (P <0 .0 5 ) ;( 2 )ANB治疗后减小 ,SNB增大且治疗前后具有显著差异 (P <0 .0 5 ) ;( 3)牙合平面角 (OP FH)治疗前后无显著差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论 :治疗过程中 ,我们成功地控制了 :( 1)面部垂直向的生长 ;( 2 )牙合平面的旋转 ;( 3)下切牙直立于基骨上。取得了良好的治疗结果 ,使颜面更加协调美观     

烤瓷表面抛光和上釉对其表面粗糙度及细菌黏附的影响

目的比较不同抛光方法对烤瓷表面粗糙度的影响,以及不同粗糙度烤瓷表面对口腔变异链球菌黏附的影响。方法采用原子力显微镜测量不同抛光方法对瓷表面粗糙度的影响,并通过细菌实验观察不同粗糙度的瓷表面对细菌黏附的影响。结果用抛光膏抛光或者上釉后,瓷面平整且有光泽。无论是表面粗糙度还是表面黏附的细菌数,橡皮轮组都大于抛光膏组和上釉组（P<0.05）。结论建议调改过的瓷表面进行抛光膏抛光或上釉以恢复瓷表面的光滑度和减少口腔致龋菌的黏附。     

The effect of prophylactic polishing pastes and toothbrushing on the surface roughness of resin composite materials in vitro

Polishing composite restorations at recall prophylaxis may affect their surface roughness. This investigation evaluated the effect of prophy paste on the surface roughness of a microfilled (Filtek A110) and a microhybrid (Filtek Z250) resin composite before and after simulated toothbrushing. Twenty, two-sided samples of both materials were fabricated in acrylic molds against a Mylar strip (baseline). Three roughness readings were recorded for each surface using a Surfanalyzer 5400 to determine the mean roughness. The samples were finished and polished with the Sof-Lex disk system and the surface roughness (Ra) was re-measured. Samples were randomly assigned and five surfaces for each material were polished with Nupro coarse, medium, fine or Clinpro prophy paste and the surface roughness measured again. All surfaces were brushed 60,000 times at 1.5Hz using a 2N brush-head force (Manly V-8 cross-brushing machine) in a 50:50 (w/w) slurry of toothpaste and water. The surface roughness was measured followed by the application of prophy paste as previously described and this final roughness recorded. Data were analyzed using repeated measures two-factor ANOVA with TUKEY HSD pairwise comparison as appropriate (alpha = 0.05). No significant difference in surface roughness was determined between the microfilled and microhybrid materials at baseline or disk treatment, yet significant differences were observed following brushing and/or prophy paste application. In conclusion, although baseline and disk treated surfaces were not significantly different in microfilled versus microhybrid composites, subsequent prophy paste application and/or simulated toothbrushing caused significant differences.     

Roughness of human enamel surface submitted to different prophylaxis methods

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate alterations in the surface roughness and micromorphology of human enamel submitted to three prophylaxis methods. Sixty-nine caries-free molars with exposed labial surfaces were divided into three groups. Group I was treated with a rotary instrument set at a low speed, rubber cup and a mixture of water and pumice; group II with a rotary instrument set at a low speed, rubber cup and prophylaxis paste Herjos-F (Vigodent S/A Indústria e Comércio, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil); and group III with sodium bicarbonate spray Profi II Ceramic (Dabi Atlante Indústrias Médico Odontológicas Ltda, Ribeir?o Preto, Brazil). All procedures were performed by the same operator for 10 s, and samples were rinsed and stored in distilled water Pre and post-treatment surface evaluation was completed using a surface profilometer (Perthometer S8P, Marh, Perthen, Germany) in 54 samples. In addition, the other samples were coated with gold and examined in a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The results of this study were statistically analyzed with the paired t-test (Student), the Kruskal-Wallis test and the Dunn (5%) test. The sodium bicarbonate spray led to significantly rougher surfaces than the pumice paste. The use of prophylaxis paste showed no statistically significant difference when compared with the other methods. Based on SEM analysis, the sodium bicarbonate spray presented an irregular surface with granular material and erosions. Based on this study, it can be concluded that there was an increased enamel surface roughness when teeth were treated with sodium bicarbonate spray when compared with teeth treated with pumice paste.     

The surface roughness of restorative materials and dental tissues after polishing with prophylaxis and polishing pastes

The effect of prophylaxis and polishing pastes on bovine tooth hard tissues and dental materials was investigated in vitro. Four restorative dental materials (gold, amalgam, a conventional composite, a microfilled composite), brought to a standard surface finish, and two bovine dental hard tissues (enamel, dentin) were polished with ten different prophylaxis and polishing pastes. Before polishing, SEM photographs were taken of all materials, and surface profiles were obtained of every sample. After polishing, surface profiles from every sample and SEM photographs of every material/paste combination were obtained. Using the same techniques, two-step polishing procedures were also investigated. The evaluation of the surface profiles and the rated SEM photographs (by 20 dentists) showed significant paste and material differences. There was a significant correlation (0.82) between the results of the surface profiles and the SEM ratings. Almost all pastes roughened the surfaces of dental restorative materials and only a few pastes showed a tendency to render the surfaces of dental restorative materials and only a few paste showed a tendency to render the surfaces of dental hard tissues smoother. Therefore, if polishing is indicated after periodontal treatment, the paste used should be selected carefully. Since the surface roughness of conventional composites increases tremendously during each polishing with pastes, their surfaces should be avoided when using polishing pastes. If polishing with a paste in indicated, conventional composites should be polished afterwards with aluminium silicate coated discs.     

Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials

Many polishing protocols have been evaluated in vitro for their effect on the surface roughness of restorative materials. These results have been useful in establishing protocols for in vivo application. However, limited research has focused on the subsequent care and maintenance of esthetic restorations following their placement. This investigation evaluated the effect of five polishing protocols that could be implemented at recall on the surface roughness of five direct esthetic restorative materials. Specimens (n=25) measuring 8 mm diameter x 3 mm thick were fabricated in an acrylic mold using five light-cured resin-based materials (hybrid composite, microfilled composite, packable composite, compomer and resin-modified glass ionomer). After photopolymerization, all specimens were polished with Sof-Lex Disks to produce an initial (baseline) surface finish. All specimens were then polished with one of five prophylactic protocols (Butler medium paste, Butler coarse paste, OneGloss, SuperBuff or OneGloss & SuperBuff). The average surface roughness of each treated specimen was determined from three measurements with a profilometer (Surface 1). Next, all specimens were brushed 60,000 times at 1.5 Hz using a brush-head force of 2 N on a Manly V-8 cross-brushing machine in a 50:50 (w/w) slurry of toothpaste and water. The surface roughness of each specimen was measured after brushing (Surface 2) followed by re-polishing with one of five protocols, then final surface roughness values were determined (Surface 3). The data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA. Significant differences (p=0.05) in surface roughness were observed among restorative materials and polishing protocols. The microfilled and hybrid resin composite yielded significantly rougher surfaces than the other three materials following tooth brushing. Prophylactic polishing protocols can be used to restore a smooth surface on resin-based esthetic restorative materials following simulated tooth brushing.     

Effect finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of IPS Empress 2 ceramic

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the surface roughness of IPS Empress 2 ceramic when treated with different finishing/polishing protocols. Materials and methods. Sixteen specimens of IPS Empress 2 ceramic were made from wax patterns obtained using a stainless steel split mold. The specimens were glazed (Stage 0–S0, control) and divided into two groups. The specimens in Group 1 (G1) were finished/polished with a KG Sorensen diamond point (S1), followed by KG Sorensen siliconized points (S2) and final polishing with diamond polish paste (S3). In Group 2 (G2), the specimens were finished/polished using a Shofu diamond point (S1), as well as Shofu siliconized points (S2) and final polishing was performed using Porcelize paste (S3). After glazing (S0) and following each polishing procedure (S1, S2 or S3), the surface roughness was measured using TALYSURF Series 2. The average surface roughness results were analyzed using ANOVA followed by Tukey post-hoc tests (α = 0.01) Results. All of the polishing procedures yielded higher surface roughness values when compared to the control group (S0). S3 yielded lower surface roughness values when compared to S1 and S2. Conclusions. The proposed treatments negatively affected the surface roughness of the glazed IPS Empress 2 ceramic.     

The effect of one-step polishing system on the surface roughness of three esthetic resin composite materials

Proper finishing of restorations is desirable not only for aesthetic considerations but also for oral health. The primary goal of finishing is to obtain a restoration that has good contour, occlusion, healthy embrasure forms and a smooth surface. This study investigated: 1) analyzing the surface roughness of three resin composites finished and polished with a new one-step and two conventional multi-step polishing systems and 2) evaluating the effectiveness of one-step polishing system and surface morphology using scanning electron microscope analysis (SEM). Specimens (N = 72) measuring 8-mm in diameter x 2-mm in thickness were fabricated in a plexiglass mold covered with a Mylar strip using three esthetic resin composites. After polymerization six specimens per resin composite received no finishing treatment and served as a control. Fifty-four specimens were randomly polished with Sof-Lex discs, Enhance disc with polishing paste or PoGo for 30 seconds after being ground wet with a 1200 grit silicon carbide paper. The average surface roughness of each polished specimen was determined with a profilometer (Surtronic 4). The data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Scheffe's post-hoc test of multiple comparisons (p < or = 0.01). Representative samples of the mentioned finishing procedures were selected and examined using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). There was no surface roughness in all resin composites tested against Mylar strip. The results showed no difference between the surfaces of Clearfil ST and Esthet-X polished with PoGo and the Mylar group (p > or = 0.01). Among all the polishing systems tested, PoGo exhibited the smoothest finish for all resin composites. The combination of Enhance and Prisma Gloss polishing paste exhibited the highest roughness values for Filtek A110 and Clearfil ST; however, it gave the same Ra values as PoGo for Esthet-X (p < or = 0.01). SEM analysis of Esthet-X samples confirmed the profilometer's results. The surfaces of the Clearfil ST discs polished with PoGo resemble that of Mylar, while Enhance and Sof-Lex exposed and dislodged the filler particles. PoGo scratched in some places Filtek A110's surface, while Enhance produced mostly a Mylar-like surface with dislodged fillers in some places.     

The effect of two polishing pastes on the surface roughness of bis-acryl composite and methacrylate-based resins

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A highly polished restoration surface is necessary to promote a plaque-free environment. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the surface roughness of 3 different bis-acryl composite-based and 3 different methyl methacrylate-based provisional crown and fixed partial denture resins after being polished with aluminum oxide and diamond paste. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six different materials were used (Iso-Temp, Protemp II, Structer 2, Dentalon Plus, Tab 2000 Kerr, Temdent). A total of 180 specimens were fabricated: 30 specimens of each material using circular stainless steel molds 10 mm in diameter and 2 mm high. Each material was mixed and polymerized according to manufacturer's instructions. The bis-acryl composite specimens were polymerized with a laboratory light-initiating unit for 30 seconds on each side (400 to 525 nm, 75 W quartz-halogen light source). All specimens were kept in a water bath at 37 degrees C for 45 minutes. Ten specimens of each group were left as untreated controls, 10 specimens of each group were polished with the aluminum oxide paste (Composite Polish), and 10 specimens of each group were polished with the diamond paste (Insta glaze). Surface roughness was determined with a profilometer. The data were analyzed with one-way analysis of variance (Post Hoc Scheffe's S test) (P<.001). In addition, the profilometric evaluations photographic images were recorded with a scanning electron microscope to examine the surface roughness after polishing. RESULTS: The mean of the surface characteristics of the bis-acryl composites were 1.33 microm for aluminum oxide and 0.90 microm for diamond polishing paste; the mean of the results of the methyl methacrylate resins were 1 microm for aluminum oxide and 0.50 microm for diamond polishing paste. The difference between the mean values of bis-acryl resins groups and methacrylate-based resin groups were significant (P<.001). The difference between the subgroups of bis-acryl resins group (Iso-Temp, Protemp II, Structer 2) were not significant (P>.05). The difference between the subgroups of methacrylate-based resin group (Dentalon, Tab 2000, Temdent) were not significant (P>.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, single-phase polishing of the bis-acryl composites tested and the methacrylate resins tested with diamond-based paste produced a smoother surface than when polished with aluminum oxide paste.     

含精氨酸的抗敏抛光膏对暴露牙本质表面变异链球菌黏附的影响

目的 研究含精氨酸抗敏抛光膏对暴露牙本质表面变异链球菌黏附的影响。方法 暴露牙本质小管,使用浮石粉和抗敏抛光膏处理表面,观察其粗糙度的变化。体外培养变异链球菌,观察其在牙本质片表面黏附及葡糖基转移酶（GTFs）基因表达情况。结果 使用浮石粉及抗敏抛光膏均能有效降低表面粗糙度,抗敏抛光膏处理后的牙本质能明显抑制gtfB和gtfC基因的表达。结论 含精氨酸抗敏抛光膏能抑制变异链球菌黏附及gtfB和gtfC基因的表达,对敏感牙本质区域龋病发生具有一定防治作用。     

Effect of oral prophylactic instrumentation on the surface texture of all metal restorative materials

Introduction:

In the inaccessible areas on the crown the removal of calculus and stains by hand and ultrasonic instrumentation is the method for cleaning to preserve and increase the longevity of the restoration. However, when oral prophylaxis is performed on restorative crowns, it may produce some surface alterations and may favour plaque accumulation.

Statement of Problem:

Many patients may have restored their teeth with artificial crowns and would come to the dental office for oral prophylaxis. If a routine oral prophylaxis is followed, its effect on the restorative materials and the plaque accumulation can be studied.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 15 disc shaped wax patterns were invested and casted for cast titanium (Group A) and the remaining 15 disk shaped for nickel-chromium (Group B). The obtained castings were finished and polished. All the specimens were subjected to hand and ultrasonic scaling for 15 s. Profilometer and scanning electron microscopic was used to analyze and evaluate the surface roughness. Specimens of each group were embedded on the anterior lingual aspects of the removable lower retention plates. 5 volunteers were asked to wear it in the mouth for 24 h for 7 days. After 7 days, the specimens were stained with plaque disclosing solutions and the photomicrographs were taken by the optical stereomicroscope and the plaque accumulations were assessed in percentage.

Results:

The difference in average surface roughness (μm) of the polished test specimens was maximum for ultrasonic scaling than hand scaling and maximum for Group A than Group B. Plaque accumulation in percentage on the treated specimens was found to be nonsignificant but, mean plaque accumulation was maximum on ultrasonic scaling surface than hand scaling and maximum for Group A than Group B. Surface roughness was found to be statistically significant after hand scaling (F = 9.377, P = 0.000) and ultrasonic scaling (F = 5.373, P = 0.0000) by Student t-test.

Conclusion:

The Surface roughness and plaque accumulation on the specimens were more for Group A than Group B and maximum produced by ultrasonic scaling than hand scaling.