Surface roughness, plaque accumulation, and cytotoxicity of provisional restorative materials fabricated by different methods

被引:21
|
作者
Giti, Rashin [1 ]
Dabiri, Shima [1 ]
Motamedifar, Mohammad [2 ]
Derafshi, Reza [1 ]
机构
[1] Shiraz Univ Med Sci, Sch Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Biomat Res Ctr, Shiraz, Fars, Iran
[2] Shiraz Univ Med Sci, Shiraz HIV AIDS Res Ctr, Inst Hlth, Dept Bacteriol & Virol,Med Sch, Shiraz, Fars, Iran
来源
PLOS ONE | 2021年 / 16卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0249551
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Fabricating method may affect the surface properties and biological characteristics of provisional restorations. This study aimed to evaluate the surface roughness, plaque accumulation, and cytotoxicity of provisional restorative materials fabricated by the conventional, digital subtractive and additive methods. Sixty-six bar-shaped specimens (2x4x10 mm) were fabricated by using provisional restorative materials through the conventional, digital subtractive and additive methods (n = 22 per group). Ten specimens of each group were used for surface roughness and plaque accumulation tests, 10 specimens for cytotoxicity assay, and 2 specimens of each group were used for qualitative assessment by scanning electron microscopy. The R-a (roughness average) and R-z (roughness height) values (mu m) were measured via profilometer, and visual inspection was performed through scanning electron microscopy. Plaque accumulation of Streptococcus mutans and cytotoxicity on human gingival fibroblast-like cells were evaluated. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (alpha = 0.05). Surface roughness, biofilm accumulation and cytotoxicity were significantly different among the groups (P<0.05). Surface roughness was significantly higher in the conventional group (P<0.05); however, the two other groups were not significantly different (P>0.05). Significantly higher bacterial attachment was observed in the additive group than the subtractive (P<0.001) and conventional group (P = 0.025); while, the conventional and subtractive groups were statistically similar (P = 0.111). Regarding the cytotoxicity, the additive group had significantly higher cell viability than the subtractive group (P = 0.006); yet, the conventional group was not significantly different from the additive (P = 0.354) and subtractive group (P = 0.101). Surface roughness was the highest in conventionally cured group; but, the additive group had the most plaque accumulation and lowest cytotoxicity.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cytotoxicity and inflammatory response of different types of provisional restorative materials
    Campaner, Marcio
    Takamiya, Aline Satie
    Bitencourt, Sandro Basso
    Mazza, Leticia Cerri
    Penha de Oliveira, Sandra Helena
    Shibayama, Ricardo
    Ricardo Barao, Valentim Adelino
    Sukotjo, Cortino
    Pesqueira, Aldieris Alves
    ARCHIVES OF ORAL BIOLOGY, 2020, 111
  • [2] Effect of different polishing methods on surface roughness of provisional prosthetic materials
    Maia Tupinamba, Ivian Verena
    Correa Giampa, Priscila Couy
    Rios Rocha, Isadora Almeida
    Castor Xisto Lima, Emilena Maria
    JOURNAL OF INDIAN PROSTHODONTIC SOCIETY, 2018, 18 (02): : 96 - 101
  • [3] Color stability of provisional restorative materials with different fabrication methods
    Song, So-Yeon
    Shin, Yo-Han
    Lee, Jeong-Yol
    Shin, Sang-Wan
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2020, 12 (05): : 259 - 264
  • [4] COMPARISON OF RATES OF PLAQUE ACCUMULATION ON RESTORATIVE MATERIALS
    GILDENHU.RR
    STALLARD, RE
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1973, 52 : 240 - &
  • [5] Comparative Evaluation of Flexural Strength and Surface Roughness of Three Different Commercially Available Provisional Restorative Materials: An In-vitro Study
    Rajput, Rashmi
    Hasti, Anurag
    Choudhary, Ashish
    Duggal, Surabhi
    Ali, Sheeba
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2022, 16 (01) : ZC8 - ZC12
  • [6] Surface Roughness Analysis of Microchannels Featuring Microfluidic Devices Fabricated by Three Different Materials and Methods
    Acosta-Cuevas, Jose M.
    Garcia-Ramirez, Mario A.
    Hinojosa-Ventura, Gabriela
    Martinez-Gomez, Alvaro J.
    Perez-Luna, Victor H.
    Gonzalez-Reynoso, Orfil
    COATINGS, 2023, 13 (10)
  • [7] Adherence of plaque components to different restorative materials
    Kawai, K
    Urano, M
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2001, 26 (04) : 396 - 400
  • [9] Study Regarding the Effect of Toothbrush and Toothpaste on Surface Roughness of Different Restorative Materials
    Stoleriu, Simona
    Pancu, Galina
    Nica, Irina
    Andrian, Sorin
    Topoliceanu, Claudiu
    Iovan, Gianina
    MATERIALE PLASTICE, 2016, 53 (04) : 752 - 754
  • [10] Surface roughness of selected restorative materials.
    Osorio, R
    Toledano, M
    Rosales, JI
    Osorio, E
    Garcia-Godoy, F
    Barranquero, M
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2000, 79 : 278 - 278