981 resultados para SURFACE-ROUGHNESS
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Background: This study evaluated the effect of disinfection by immersion and microwave irradiation on the roughness of one denture base resin (Lucitone-L) and five relining materials, three hard (Tokuyama Rebase II-TR, New Truliner-NT, Ufigel Hard-UH) and two resilient (Trusoft-T, Sofreliner-S).Methods: Fifty specimens were made and divided into groups: CL2 specimens were brushed with 4% chlorhexidine (1 min), immersed in the same solution (10 min) and immersed in water (3 min); MW2 specimens were immersed in water and microwave irradiated (650W; 6 min); CL2 and MW2 specimens were disinfected twice; CL7 and MW7 specimens were submitted to seven cycles using chlorhexidine or microwave irradiation, respectively; W specimens were not disinfected and remained in water (37 degrees C; 7 days).Results: Results were statistically analysed (p = 0.05) and revealed that, at baseline, the highest mean value was observed for T (p < 0.001). Material NT showed increase in roughness after the first (p = 0.003), second (p = 0.001), seventh (p = 0.000) cycles of microwave disinfection and after 7 days of immersion in water (p = 0.033).Conclusions: Resilient liner S presented significant increase in roughness after the second cycle of disinfection with chlorhexidine (p = 0.003). Material T exhibited significantly decreased roughness in group W (p = 0.010), while microwaving produced severe alterations on its surface.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
This study assessed the in vitro influence of surface sealing on the surface roughness of a posterior resin composite before and after tooth-brushing. Thirty. specimens (13 nun diameter x 1 mm high) were fabricated from Filtek-P60 resin composite and randomly assigned to three groups (n=10): a non-sealed control and two groups sealed with one of the tested materials-a surface-penetrating sealant (Protect-it!-PI) and a one bottle adhesive system (Single Bond-SB). The samples were subjected to a surface roughness reading to determine the initial roughness, then submitted to simulated toothbrushing with 35,600 cycles for 100 minutes. Specimens were then cleaned and a post-abrasion surface roughness reading accomplished. Means (pm), recorded before (B) and after (A) toothbrushing, and standard deviations were: Control-(B): 0.032 (+/-0.005), (A): 0.054 (+/-0.005); PI-(B): 0.034 (+/-0.005), (A): 0.060 (+/-0.034); SB (B): 0.031 (+/-0.004), (A): 0.047 (+/-0.007). Data were tabulated and submitted to two-way ANOVA. No statistically significant difference was observed when the control and experimental groups were compared. However, a significant difference (p<0.05) was found between the measurements performed before and after toothbrushing. Based on these results, it may be concluded that using either a surface penetrating sealant or a one bottle adhesive system did not provide the optimization of superficial integrity. The use of a dentifrice and toothbrush resulted in significant alterations to the surface smoothness of the resin composite.
Resumo:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of two glass-ionomer cements (Vitremer and Chelon-Fil), and one compomer (Dyract) when submitted to different finishing/polishing procedures at different times. A hundred 80-sample discs were made of each material and randomly divided into six finishing/polishing groups: mylar strip (control); Sof-Lex discs; diamond burs; diamond burs/Sof-Lex discs; 30-fluted carbide bur; 30-fluted carbide bur/Sof-Lex discs. These procedures were carried out immediately after preparation of the samples, after 24 and 168 h. Average surface roughness (Ra) was measured with a profilometer and the values were compared using anova (P < 0.05). The smoothest surface for all materials was obtained when cured in contact with the mylar strip. All other tested products increased surface roughness of restorative materials, but Sof-lex discs lead to better results. The worst results were verified with diamond burs. The finishing/polishing procedures, when performed immediately, can improve the roughness of glass-ionomer cements but not of the compomer tested.
Resumo:
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness and the in vitro adherence of Streptococcus mutans to indirect aesthetic restorative materials that are uncoated with saliva.Materials and Methods: Four groups of restorative materials were evaluated according to material type: (1) microparticulate feldspathic ceramic; (2) leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic; (3) microhybrid resin composite and (4) microfilled resin composite. Twenty standardised samples of each material were produced. Roughness analysis (Ra, n = 10) was performed using a roughness analyser. Adhesion tests (n = 10) were carried out in 24-well plates; colony-forming units (CFU/mL) were evaluated. The mean values of roughness (mu m) and adherence (CFU/mL) for each group were subjected to an analysis of variance and a Tukey test.Results: The leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic was rougher and presented higher bacterial adherence than the microparticulate feldspathic ceramic. The resin composites were similar with regard to surface roughness and bacterial adherence.Conclusions: The microhybrid and microfilled resin composites were similar and the leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic was rougher and presented higher bacterial adherence than the microparticulate feldspathic ceramic.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
