The effects of pediatric dentifrices with different types of fluoride on the color change of restorative materials

3Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the effects of dentifrices with different fluoride content on color change of restorative materials commonly used in pediatric dentistry. Materials and Methods Three restorative materials (glass hybrid [Equia Forte (EF)], glass carbomer [GCP Glass Fill (GCP)] and compomer [Dyract XP (DXP)]) were used to prepare 120 disc shaped specimens by using a Teflon ring. Four dentifrice groups were created as Sodium Fluoride (NaF), Amine Fluoride (AmF), Stannous Fluoride (SnF2) and no-fluoride (n=40). Simulated tooth brushing was performed for each specimen by applying 6720 strokes for 6 months. Color changes [CIEDE2000 (ΔE00)] were calculated by using generalized linear model procedure and the data were subjected to two-way analysis of variance. Results The highest color changes for NaF and AmF dentifrice groups were observed in the GCP restorative material (p<0.05). The color changes of restorative materials tested with SnF2dentifrice group were statistically different (p<0.05) in each restorative material and ΔE00values were observed as GCP> EF>DXP. SnF2 dentifrice provided better color stability for all restorative materials when compared to NaF and AmF dentifrices; although, this was not statistically significant. GCP underwent significant discoloration values when brushed with all types of dentifrices. Conclusion Although the glass carbomers caused significant color change, the compomers seem to be more resistant to the color change when brushed with all types of dentifrices. The fluoride content of dentifrices is crucial for the color change of restorative materials.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kaya, E., & Yildirim, S. (2022). The effects of pediatric dentifrices with different types of fluoride on the color change of restorative materials. European Oral Research, 56(1), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.26650/eor.2022881264

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free