Erosion and abrasion of tooth-colored restorative materials and human enamel

Yu, Hao; Wegehaupt, Florian J.; Wiegand, Annette; Roos, Malgorzata; Attin, Thomas; Buchalla, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2009.07.006

« Previous Next »Journal of Dentistry
Volume 37, Issue 12 , Pages 913-922, December 2009

Erosion and abrasion of tooth-colored restorative materials and human enamel

Hao Yu
- Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich 8032, Switzerland
- Corresponding author. Tel.: +41 44 634 3354; fax: +41 44 634 4308.
Florian J. Wegehaupt
- Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich 8032, Switzerland
Annette Wiegand
- Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich 8032, Switzerland
Malgorzata Roos
- Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Thomas Attin
- Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich 8032, Switzerland
Wolfgang Buchalla
- Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich 8032, Switzerland

Received 8 June 2009; received in revised form 14 July 2009; accepted 16 July 2009. published online 27 July 2009.

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of erosion and toothbrush abrasion on different restorative materials and human enamel.

Methods

Human enamel and 5 kinds of tooth-colored restorative materials were used. The restorative materials included three composite resins (Filtek Silorane, Tetric EvoCeram, and Tetric EvoFlow), a polyacid-modified composite (Dyract Extra), and a conventional glass-ionomer cement (Ketac Fil Plus). For each type of the material, 40 specimens were prepared and embedded in ceramic moulds and divided into four groups (n=10): control group (C), erosion group (E), abrasion group (A), and erosion–abrasion group (EA). The specimens were subjected to six daily erosive attacks (groups E and EA; citric acid, pH 2.3, 1min) and/or six abrasive attacks (groups A and EA; toothbrush abrasion, 100 strokes, 1min), while the control specimens (group C) were maintained in artificial saliva. After 10-day treatment, the substance loss and surface changes were determined by surface profilometry and scanning electron microscopy.

Results

Human enamel presented higher substance loss when compared to restorative materials. Generally, combined erosion–abrasion (EA) caused the highest substance loss, followed by erosion, abrasion, and storage in artificial saliva. Composite resin presented highest durability under erosive and/or abrasive attacks. Enamel and restorative materials showed degradation in groups E and EA through SEM observation.

Conclusions

Toothbrush abrasion has a synergistic effect with erosion on substance loss of human enamel, polyacid-modified composite and glass-ionomer cement. The acid- and abrasive-resistance of human enamel was lower compared to restorative materials.

Keywords: Erosion, Abrasion, Restorative material, Human enamel