ISSN:
1600-051X
Source:
Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005
Topics:
Medicine
Notes:
Background: In an in vitro study, the surface wear on cervical restorations and adjacent enamel and root cementum caused by different tooth-cleaning methods in simulated long-term therapy was investigated.Methods: Cervical restorations of amalgam (Oralloy®), modified composite resin (Dyract®), glass-ionomer cement (ChemFill Superior®), and composite (Tetric®) were instrumented by POL (polishing), CUR+POL (curette and polishing), US+POL (ultrasonic device with polishing) and the polishing agents Cleanic® and Proxyt® in a computer-controlled test bench. Treatment time corresponding to a real-time period of 5 or 10 years. Substance loss from instrumented surfaces was measured with a digital gauge. A three-way anova was used in the statistical evaluation.Results: The results showed that POL led to slight substance loss, which was greater using Cleanic® (27 μm) than Proxyt® (5 μm). CUR+POL produced a significantly greater substance loss than did US+POL, with 186 μm versus 35 μm on glass-ionomer cement, respectively, and 123 μm versus 18 μm, respectively, on root cementum, followed by composite (111 μm versus 27 μm, respectively), polyacid modified composite resin/compomer (89 μm versus 36 μm), amalgam (75 μm versus 19 μm), and enamel (32 μm versus 23 μm).Conclusions: As opposed to the use of US+POL or POL, substance loss on cervical restorations and especially root cementum must be expected to result from tooth-cleaning during long-term maintenance treatment using CUR+POL.
Type of Medium:
Electronic Resource
URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2004.00482.x
Permalink