SURFACE MICROHARDNESS OF MICROHYBRID AND NANOCOMPOSITE AFTER STORAGE IN MOUTH WASHES

Authors

  • Sadia Manzoor Margala Insitute of Health Sciences Rawalpindi
  • Zartashia Arooj University of Health Sciences
  • Mohammad Abi Waqas Multan Medical & Dental College
  • Nadia Irshad University of Health Sciences
  • Asfia Saeed University of Health Sciences
  • Aeeza Malik University of Health Sciences
  • Zenab Sarfaraz University of Health Sciences
  • Malik Saleem Shaukat University of Health Sciences

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55519/JAMC-03-10181

Keywords:

Resin composites, Mouthwashes, Microhardness, Microhybrid composite, Hardness test

Abstract

Background: Dental composites are aesthetic direct restorative material. However, the effect of mouthwashes on the durability of the material is controversial. This study evaluated and compared the influence of mouthwash composition on the surface hardness of nanofilled (Z350XT) and microhybrid (P60) resin composites. Methods: Comparative in-vitro study was conducted over 6 months at Multan Medical & Dental College. Sixty-four disc-shape specimens of each {nanofilled (Z350XT) and microhybrid (P60)} resin composite were prepared and stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. The baseline microhardness reading (To) was recorded by Vickers micro-hardness tester. Samples were then randomly divided into four groups (n=16) and stored in Listerine Cool Mint, Colgate Plax, Clinica and distilled water (control). The hardness test was repeated after 12 hours and 24 hours of storage. Results: Nanocomposite (Z350XT) had statistically (p<0.01) higher surface hardness. A significant reduction (p≤0.05) in microhardness was observed after immersion of samples in mouthwashes. The reduction in surface hardness was dependent on the immersion time and composition of mouthwashes. Listerine Cool Mint (alcohol-based mouthwash) had greatest degradation effect. Conclusion: Mouth rinses negatively impacted the surface microhardness of the tested resin-based materials. Alcohol-based mouthwashes had greater potential for reducing microhardness. Microhybrid composite appears to be a more suitable material for restoring teeth in patients accustomed to using regular mouthwashes.

References

Alzraikat H, Burrow M, Maghaireh G, Taha N. Nanofilled resin composite properties and clinical performance: a review. Oper Dent. 2018;43(4):E173-E90.

da Silva E, de Sá Rodrigues C, Dias D, da Silva S, Amaral C, Guimarães J. Effect of Toothbrushing-mouthrinse-cycling on Surface Roughness and Topography of Nanofilled, Microfilled, and Microhybrid Resin Composites. Oper Dent. 2014;39(5):521-9.

Ozer S, Sen Tunc E, Tuloglu N, Bayrak S. Solubility of two resin composites in different mouthrinses. Biomed Res Int. 2014:580675. doi: 10.1155/2014/580675.

Randolph LD, Palin WM, Leloup G, Leprince JG. Filler characteristics of modern dental resin composites and their influence on physico-mechanical properties. Dent Mater. 2016;32(12):1586-99.

Poggio C, Viola M, Mirando M, Chiesa M, Beltrami R, Colombo M. Microhardness of different esthetic restorative materials: Evaluation and comparison after exposure to acidic drink. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2018;15(3):166-72.

Cao L, Zhao X, Gong X, Zhao S. An in vitro investigation of wear resistance and hardness of composite resins. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2013;6(6):423-30.

Festuccia MSCC, Garcia LdFR, Cruvinel DR, Pires-De-Souza FdC. Color stability, surface roughness and microhardness of composites submitted to mouthrinsing action. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(2):200-5.

Koshhar R, Dewan R, Soi S, Punjabi M. An evaluation and comparison of the effect of five mouthrinses on the microhardness of esthetic hybrid composite restorative-material-an in vitro study. J Dent Specialities. 2017;5:66-9.

Jyothi K, Crasta S, Venugopal P. Effect of five commercial mouth rinses on the microhardness of a nanofilled resin composite restorative material: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2012;15(3):214.

Miranda DdA, Bertoldo CEdS, Aguiar FHB, Lima DANL, Lovadino JR. Effects of mouthwashes on Knoop hardness and surface roughness of dental composites after different immersion times. Brazil Oral Res. 2011;25(2):168-73.

Diab M, Zaazou M, Mubarak E, Olaa M. Effect of five commercial mouthrinses on the microhardness and color stability of two resin composite restorative materials. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2007;1(4):667-74.

Wataha JC, Lewis J, Lockwood P, Hsu S, Messer R, Rueggeberg F, et al. Blue light differentially modulates cell survival and growth. J Dent Research. 2004;83(2):104-8.

Casanova Obando PE, Taboada Alvear MF, Flores Cuvi DS, Castilla M, Armas AdC. Effect of three mouthrinses on surface degradation of resin composite: in vitro study. Revista de Odontopediatría Latinoamericana. 2020;8(2):141-53.

Rajasekhar R, James B, Johny MK, Jacob J. Evaluation of the effect of two commercially available non-alcoholic mouth rinses on the microhardness of composite material-An invitro study. Dent J. 2019; 1(1):14-21

Das S, Sowmya K. An evaluation of the effect of alcohol and non-alcohol based mouth rinses on the microhardness of two esthetic restorative materials–An in vitro study. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2015;1:27-31.

Nowak M, Kalamarz I, Chladek G. Mechanical properties of Easy Fill composites after storage in mouthwashes. J Achiev Mater Manuf Eng. 2018;88(1):25-31

Goyal DA, George DJV, Mathew DS, Singh DR, Ramesh D, editors. Effect of four commercial mouth rinses on the microhardness and solubility of a supra nanocomposite and a microhybrid composite: An in vitro study2016.

Dash S, Kallepalli S. An evaluation of the effect of Alcohol and Non-Alcohol based mouth rinses on the microhardness of two esthetic restorative materials–An in vitro Study. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 2015;1(2):27-31.

de Moraes PI, das Neves L, de Souza C, Parolia A, Barbosa DSN. A comparative effect of mouthwashes with different alcohol concentrations on surface hardness, sorption and solubility of composite resins. Oral Health Dent Manag. 2014;13(2):502-6.

Downloads

Published

2022-06-21