COMPARISON OF MICROHARDNESS OF ARTIFICIAL TEETH WITH DIFFERENT CONTENTS AFTER WAITING IN VARIOUS LIQUIDS

Ayşegül Göze Saygın; Mustafa Yıldırımoğlu

doi:10.7126/cumudj.1060543

EN

COMPARISON OF MICROHARDNESS OF ARTIFICIAL TEETH WITH DIFFERENT CONTENTS AFTER WAITING IN VARIOUS LIQUIDS

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the long-term microhardness of different artificial teeth after waiting in liquids of various pH values. Materials and Methods: Four different artificial teeth [conventional PMMA(Ivostar) as control group), double cross-linked PMMA(DCL), micro-filled composite resin(VivodentPE), nanohybrid composite resin(PhonaresiII)] were used for the study. After the samples fixed on acrylic blocks were immersed in distilled water at 37˚C for 24 hours, initial microhardness (T0) measurements were performed. Randomly selected samples from each group were immersed in liquids with different pH values (artificial saliva, kefir, orange juice, cola). Measurements repeated on the 7th day on the same samples were recorded as T1, and measurements repeated on the 14th day were recorded as T2. The data obtained were evaluated in the SPSS 22.0 program. Friedman and Kruskall Wallis tests were used to compare of the groups. Results: While the highest initial microhardness averages were found in the Phonares II group, the lowest average belongs to the Ivostar group. Microhardness findings of all materials measured at different times were obtained in the order of T0>T1>T2. When the data of samples aged in different liquids are compared, significant differences are observed (p<0.05). When the microhardness measurements of a single material exposed in different solutions were compared, no difference was found between the solutions (p>0.05) Conclusions: A decrease in microhardness of materials that are immersed in liquids with different pH values for a long time was observed, and the microhardness of the materials exposed to these solutions is adversely affected.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

sivas cumhuriyet üniversitesi

Project Number

Diş-275

References

1. Alfouzan AF, AlNouwaisar AN, AlAzzam NF, vd. Power brushing and chemical denture cleansers induced color changes of pre-polymerized CAD/CAM denture acrylic resins. Mater Res Express. 2021;8(8):85402.
2. Shetty MS, Shenoy KK. An in vitro analysis of wear resistance of commercially available acrylic denture teeth. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2010;10(3):149–153.
3. Suzuki S. In vitro wear of nano‐composite denture teeth. J Prosthodont Implant Esthet Reconstr Dent. 2004;13(4):238–243.
4. Loyaga-Rendon PG, Takahashi H, Hayakawa I, Iwasaki N. Compositional characteristics and hardness of acrylic and composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;98(2):141–149.
5. Patil SB, Naveen BH, Patil NP. Bonding acrylic teeth to acrylic resin denture bases: a review. Gerodontology. 2006;23(3):131–139.
6. Munshi N, Rosenblum M, Jiang S, Flinton R. In Vitro Wear Resistance of Nano‐Hybrid Composite Denture Teeth. J Prosthodont. 2017;26(3):224–229.
7. Ghazal M, Yang B, Ludwig K, Kern M. Two-body wear of resin and ceramic denture teeth in comparison to human enamel. Dent Mater. 2008;24(4):502–507.
8. Zeng J, Sato Y, Ohkubo C, Hosoi T. In vitro wear resistance of three types of composite resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(5):453–457.

9. Campanha NH, Pavarina AC, Vergani CE, Machado AL. Effect of microwave sterilization and water storage on the Vickers hardness of acrylic resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93(5):483–487.
10. Bansal K, Acharya SR, Saraswathi V. Effect of alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages on color stability and surface roughness of resin composites: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent JCD. 2012;15(3):283.
11. Ghazal M, Albashaireh ZS, Kern M. Wear resistance of nanofilled composite resin and feldspathic ceramic artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(6):441–448.
12. Ghazal M, Hedderich J, Kern M. Wear of feldspathic ceramic, nano‐filled composite resin and acrylic resin artificial teeth when opposed to different antagonists. Eur J Oral Sci. 2008;116(6):585–592.
13. Tuna SH, Keyf F, Gumus HO, Uzun C. The evaluation of water sorption/solubility on various acrylic resins. Eur J Dent. 2008;2(03):191–197.
14. Ferracane JL. Hygroscopic and hydrolytic effects in dental polymer networks. Dent Mater. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2005.05.005
15. Henn-Donassollo S, Fabris C, Gagiolla M, vd. In situ and in vitro effects of two bleaching treatments on human enamel hardness. Braz Dent J. 2016;27:56–59.
16. Goiato MC, Dos Santos DM, Andreotti AM, vd. Effect of beverages and mouthwashes on the hardness of polymers used in intraoral prostheses. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(7):559–564.
17. Ten Cate JM. Physicochemical aspects of fluoride-enamel interactions. Fluoride Dent. 1996.
18. Bevenius J, L’Estrange P. Chairside evaluation of salivary parameters in patients with tooth surface loss: a pilot study. Aust Dent J. 1990;35(3):219–221.
19. Grippo JO, Simring M, Schreiner S. Attrition, abrasion, corrosion and abfraction revisited: a new perspective on tooth surface lesions. J Am Dent Assoc. 2004;135(8):1109–1118.
20. Han L, Okamoto A, Fukushima M, Okiji T. Evaluation of flowable resin composite surfaces eroded by acidic and alcoholic drinks. Dent Mater J. 2008;27(3):455–465.
21. Lussi A, Jaeggi T, Zero D. The role of diet in the aetiology of dental erosion. Caries Res. 2004;38(Suppl. 1):34–44.
22. Festuccia MSCC, Garcia L da FR, Cruvinel DR, Pires-De-Souza F de CP. Color stability, surface roughness and microhardness of composites submitted to mouthrinsing action. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(2):200–205.
23. Von Fraunhofer JA, Rogers MM. Dissolution of dental enamel in soft drinks. Gen Dent. 2004.
24. Ersu B, HANNAK WB, Wolfgang B. FREESMEYER. The Comparison of Hardness of Total and Partial Prostheses Acrylic Resin Denture Teeth. J Hacettepe Fac Dent. 2007;31(4):58–64.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Health Care Administration

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Ayşegül Göze Saygın ^*
0000-0003-2826-5011
Türkiye

Mustafa Yıldırımoğlu
0000-0002-8684-3580
Türkiye

Publication Date

June 30, 2022

Submission Date

January 20, 2022

Acceptance Date

March 1, 2022

Published in Issue

Year 2022 Volume: 25 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7126/cumudj.1060543

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA56DC38BU

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Göze Saygın A, Yıldırımoğlu M (June 1, 2022) COMPARISON OF MICROHARDNESS OF ARTIFICIAL TEETH WITH DIFFERENT CONTENTS AFTER WAITING IN VARIOUS LIQUIDS. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 25 2 111–116.

The Evaluation of the Dietary Habits Influence on the Microhardness of Gingiva-Coloured Composite and Acrylic Denture Base Materials

Advances in Nanoparticles

https://doi.org/10.4236/anp.2024.133006

COMPARISON OF MICROHARDNESS OF ARTIFICIAL TEETH WITH DIFFERENT CONTENTS AFTER WAITING IN VARIOUS LIQUIDS

COMPARISON OF MICROHARDNESS OF ARTIFICIAL TEETH WITH DIFFERENT CONTENTS AFTER WAITING IN VARIOUS LIQUIDS

Abstract

Keywords

Öz

Supporting Institution

Project Number

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite

Cited By

TRIBOLOGICAL TESTS OF ACRYLIC TEETH FOR REMOVABLE DENTURES

Surface hardness and wear resistance of prefabricated and CAD‐CAM milled artificial teeth: A cross‐over clinical study

Assessing the Current Landscape and Future Directions of Digital Denture Technology

The Evaluation of the Dietary Habits Influence on the Microhardness of Gingiva-Coloured Composite and Acrylic Denture Base Materials