Evaluation of the remineralizing efficacy of GC Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix using surface microhardness and surface roughness analysis in deciduous molars: an in vitro study

Tatiya Neeti, Jayatri Mondal, Syeda Sara Samreen
{"title":"Evaluation of the remineralizing efficacy of GC Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix using surface microhardness and surface roughness analysis in deciduous molars: an in vitro study","authors":"Tatiya Neeti, Jayatri Mondal, Syeda Sara Samreen","doi":"10.56501/intjpedorehab.v8i1.740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To compare and evaluate using surface microhardness measurement, and surface roughness analysis in deciduous molars using GC Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix.\nMaterial and methodology: A four-equal window acid resistant varnish was placed around the exposed enamel surface of forty removed deciduous molars before they were submerged in a demineralizing solution and remineralized for weeks using Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix.\nStatistical Analysis Used: One Way ANOVA and Post Hoc Turkey test (P<0.05) were used\nResults: Following 4 weeks of remineralization, all specimens underwent SEM analysis and revealed indications of thickening of their inter-rod material. Tooth Mousse Plus also revealed pronounced remineralization evidence. Enafix demonstrated greater resistance to breakdown during the last acid exposure. Surface micro hardness (SMH) and surface roughness (Ra) both showed comparable results, with a noticeable decrease in roughness values and an increase in microhardness values, while Enafix showed a greater source of remineralization and Tooth Mousse Plus showed a greater resistance to the final acid challenge.\nConclusion: Enafix has demonstrated superior resistance to the final acid trial, whereas superior remineralization property was seen in GC Tooth Mousse Plus.","PeriodicalId":222181,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation","volume":"284 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pedodontic Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56501/intjpedorehab.v8i1.740","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To compare and evaluate using surface microhardness measurement, and surface roughness analysis in deciduous molars using GC Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix. Material and methodology: A four-equal window acid resistant varnish was placed around the exposed enamel surface of forty removed deciduous molars before they were submerged in a demineralizing solution and remineralized for weeks using Tooth Mousse Plus and Enafix. Statistical Analysis Used: One Way ANOVA and Post Hoc Turkey test (P<0.05) were used Results: Following 4 weeks of remineralization, all specimens underwent SEM analysis and revealed indications of thickening of their inter-rod material. Tooth Mousse Plus also revealed pronounced remineralization evidence. Enafix demonstrated greater resistance to breakdown during the last acid exposure. Surface micro hardness (SMH) and surface roughness (Ra) both showed comparable results, with a noticeable decrease in roughness values and an increase in microhardness values, while Enafix showed a greater source of remineralization and Tooth Mousse Plus showed a greater resistance to the final acid challenge. Conclusion: Enafix has demonstrated superior resistance to the final acid trial, whereas superior remineralization property was seen in GC Tooth Mousse Plus.
用表面显微硬度和表面粗糙度分析评价GC牙摩丝Plus和Enafix在乳牙中再矿化效果的体外研究
目的:比较和评价GC - Tooth Mousse Plus和Enafix对乳牙表面显微硬度和表面粗糙度的测量结果。材料和方法:在40颗摘除的乳牙暴露的牙釉质表面涂上一层四等温的耐酸清漆,然后将其浸入脱矿溶液中,并使用牙齿摩丝Plus和Enafix进行再矿化处理数周。采用单因素方差分析和事后火鸡检验(P<0.05)。结果:再矿化4周后,所有标本进行扫描电镜分析,显示其棒间材料增厚的迹象。牙齿摩丝Plus也显示了明显的再矿化证据。Enafix在最后一次酸暴露中表现出更强的抗分解能力。表面显微硬度(SMH)和表面粗糙度(Ra)都显示出相似的结果,粗糙度值明显降低,显微硬度值明显增加,而Enafix显示出更大的再矿化来源,而Tooth Mousse Plus显示出更强的抗酸能力。结论:Enafix具有较好的抗酸性,而GC牙摩丝Plus具有较好的再矿化性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信