Shreya Tyagi, Abi M Thomas, Neeta Devi Sinnappah-Kang
{"title":"树脂基和清漆基玻璃离子水门汀表面保护剂的比较评价——分光光度法分析。","authors":"Shreya Tyagi, Abi M Thomas, Neeta Devi Sinnappah-Kang","doi":"10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC). The different surface protective agents used were: Vaseline<sup>®</sup>, GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish), G-Coat Plus™ (resin) and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat (resin). <b>Method:</b> Thirty-six identical specimens of GIC were made. Six specimens were used in preparation of standard solution and remaining thirty were divided into five groups with six specimens in each group. Each test specimen was coated with one of the surface protecting agent except for the control group. The specimens were immersed separately into 1 ml of 0.05% methylene blue solution for 24 h and then rinsed with deionised water and further immersed into tubes containing 1 ml of 65% nitric acid. Specimens, once completely dissolved in nitric acid solution, were filtered and centrifuged. The supernatant was used to determine the absorbance using a spectrophotometer. The effectiveness of the surface protecting agents for the GIC was recorded in micrograms of dye per specimen, where low values indicate good protection. <b>Result:</b> Tukey HSD test revealed that GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish; mean = 21.25 µg/ml), G-Coat Plus™ (resin; mean = 30.39 µg/ml) and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat (resin; mean = 9.32 µg/ml) were statistically not significantly different to each other and were effective in protecting the surface of GIC. <b>Significance:</b> The study found that there was a statistically significant difference between control and GC Fuji VARNISH™, G-Coat Plus™ and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat. The three agents were found to be equally effective in protecting the surface of GIC.</p>","PeriodicalId":72378,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","volume":"7 1","pages":"25-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative evaluation of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on glass ionomer cement - a spectrophotometric analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Shreya Tyagi, Abi M Thomas, Neeta Devi Sinnappah-Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC). The different surface protective agents used were: Vaseline<sup>®</sup>, GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish), G-Coat Plus™ (resin) and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat (resin). <b>Method:</b> Thirty-six identical specimens of GIC were made. Six specimens were used in preparation of standard solution and remaining thirty were divided into five groups with six specimens in each group. Each test specimen was coated with one of the surface protecting agent except for the control group. The specimens were immersed separately into 1 ml of 0.05% methylene blue solution for 24 h and then rinsed with deionised water and further immersed into tubes containing 1 ml of 65% nitric acid. Specimens, once completely dissolved in nitric acid solution, were filtered and centrifuged. The supernatant was used to determine the absorbance using a spectrophotometer. The effectiveness of the surface protecting agents for the GIC was recorded in micrograms of dye per specimen, where low values indicate good protection. <b>Result:</b> Tukey HSD test revealed that GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish; mean = 21.25 µg/ml), G-Coat Plus™ (resin; mean = 30.39 µg/ml) and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat (resin; mean = 9.32 µg/ml) were statistically not significantly different to each other and were effective in protecting the surface of GIC. <b>Significance:</b> The study found that there was a statistically significant difference between control and GC Fuji VARNISH™, G-Coat Plus™ and EQUIA<sup>®</sup> Coat. The three agents were found to be equally effective in protecting the surface of GIC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"25-30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1711760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
摘要
目的:评价和比较树脂基和清漆基表面保护剂对玻璃离子水门汀(GIC)的防护效果。使用的不同表面保护剂有:凡士林®、GC富士清漆™(清漆)、G-Coat Plus™(树脂)和EQUIA®Coat(树脂)。方法:制作36例相同的GIC标本。取6个标本制备标准溶液,其余30个标本分为5组,每组6个标本。除对照组外,每个试样都涂上一种表面保护剂。将标本分别浸入1 ml 0.05%亚甲基蓝溶液中24 h,然后用去离子水冲洗,再浸入含有1 ml 65%硝酸的管中。标本在硝酸溶液中完全溶解后,过滤并离心。上清液用分光光度计测定吸光度。GIC表面保护剂的有效性以每个样品的染料微克为单位记录,其中低值表明保护良好。结果:Tukey HSD测试显示GC富士清漆™(清漆;平均值= 21.25µg/ml), g - coat Plus™(树脂;平均值= 30.39µg/ml)和EQUIA®Coat(树脂;平均值= 9.32µg/ml),差异无统计学意义,均能有效保护GIC表面。意义:研究发现对照组与GC Fuji VARNISH™、G-Coat Plus™和EQUIA®Coat之间存在统计学差异。发现这三种药物对GIC表面的保护同样有效。
A comparative evaluation of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on glass ionomer cement - a spectrophotometric analysis.
Objectives: To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of resin- and varnish-based surface protective agents on Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC). The different surface protective agents used were: Vaseline®, GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish), G-Coat Plus™ (resin) and EQUIA® Coat (resin). Method: Thirty-six identical specimens of GIC were made. Six specimens were used in preparation of standard solution and remaining thirty were divided into five groups with six specimens in each group. Each test specimen was coated with one of the surface protecting agent except for the control group. The specimens were immersed separately into 1 ml of 0.05% methylene blue solution for 24 h and then rinsed with deionised water and further immersed into tubes containing 1 ml of 65% nitric acid. Specimens, once completely dissolved in nitric acid solution, were filtered and centrifuged. The supernatant was used to determine the absorbance using a spectrophotometer. The effectiveness of the surface protecting agents for the GIC was recorded in micrograms of dye per specimen, where low values indicate good protection. Result: Tukey HSD test revealed that GC Fuji VARNISH™ (varnish; mean = 21.25 µg/ml), G-Coat Plus™ (resin; mean = 30.39 µg/ml) and EQUIA® Coat (resin; mean = 9.32 µg/ml) were statistically not significantly different to each other and were effective in protecting the surface of GIC. Significance: The study found that there was a statistically significant difference between control and GC Fuji VARNISH™, G-Coat Plus™ and EQUIA® Coat. The three agents were found to be equally effective in protecting the surface of GIC.