Leili Sadaghiani1, Margaret A Wilson, Nairn H F Wilson. 1. Department of Adult Dental Health, School of Dentistry, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, and Central Manchester and Manchester Children's University Hospital NHS Trust, UK. Sadaghianil@cf.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: It is known that the use of mouthwashes and toothbrushing can affect some restorative dental materials. The purpose of this laboratory study was to investigate the effect of four commercially available mouthwashes on the surface roughness of a number of resin modified glass-ionomer restorative materials when used with and without tooth brushing. METHODS: Specimens of the restorative materials in the study (Vitremer, Compoglass and Dyract) were prepared. Half of the specimens were only exposed to a mouthwash (Plax, Macleans, Listerine, Corsodyl or deionised water as control). The remaining specimens were exposed to one of the mouthwashes in conjunction with tooth brushing. The initial surface roughness and the subsequent changes in surface roughness were assessed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and profilometry. The assessment times were: baseline, 4, 12 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Initial SEM observations of the surface morphology of the specimens revealed a rougher surface for Vitremer in comparison to the other two materials. Assessments at increasing time intervals showed that specimens exposed to a mouthwash only appeared to become rougher. The appearance of specimens exposed to mouthwash and brushing seemed to become even rougher with increasing time. The results of the profilometric assessment showed that at 24 weeks, specimens exposed to mouthwash only, had an overall increase in the surface roughness values for all three materials investigated. The differences between groups allocated to different mouthwashes were not however statistically significant (P>0.05). Exposure to mouthwash and toothbrushing over the same time period resulted in an increase in roughness values in all groups. The differences between mouthwash groups were not statistically significant at this stage (P>0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: Exposure of the materials investigated to the mouthwashes included in the study had adverse effects on surface roughness. The adverse effects were more pronounced with tooth brushing.
OBJECTIVES: It is known that the use of mouthwashes and toothbrushing can affect some restorative dental materials. The purpose of this laboratory study was to investigate the effect of four commercially available mouthwashes on the surface roughness of a number of resin modified glass-ionomer restorative materials when used with and without tooth brushing. METHODS: Specimens of the restorative materials in the study (Vitremer, Compoglass and Dyract) were prepared. Half of the specimens were only exposed to a mouthwash (Plax, Macleans, Listerine, Corsodyl or deionised water as control). The remaining specimens were exposed to one of the mouthwashes in conjunction with tooth brushing. The initial surface roughness and the subsequent changes in surface roughness were assessed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and profilometry. The assessment times were: baseline, 4, 12 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Initial SEM observations of the surface morphology of the specimens revealed a rougher surface for Vitremer in comparison to the other two materials. Assessments at increasing time intervals showed that specimens exposed to a mouthwash only appeared to become rougher. The appearance of specimens exposed to mouthwash and brushing seemed to become even rougher with increasing time. The results of the profilometric assessment showed that at 24 weeks, specimens exposed to mouthwash only, had an overall increase in the surface roughness values for all three materials investigated. The differences between groups allocated to different mouthwashes were not however statistically significant (P>0.05). Exposure to mouthwash and toothbrushing over the same time period resulted in an increase in roughness values in all groups. The differences between mouthwash groups were not statistically significant at this stage (P>0.05). SIGNIFICANCE: Exposure of the materials investigated to the mouthwashes included in the study had adverse effects on surface roughness. The adverse effects were more pronounced with tooth brushing.