NAGIOS: RODERIC FUNCIONANDO

Effect of two prophylaxis methods on adherence of Streptococcus mutans to microfilled composite resin and giomer surfaces

Repositori DSpace/Manakin

IMPORTANT: Aquest repositori està en una versió antiga des del 3/12/2023. La nova instal.lació está en https://roderic.uv.es/

Effect of two prophylaxis methods on adherence of Streptococcus mutans to microfilled composite resin and giomer surfaces

Mostra el registre parcial de l'element

dc.contributor.author Kimyai, Soodabeh es
dc.contributor.author Lotfipour, Farzaneh es
dc.contributor.author Pourabbas, Reza es
dc.contributor.author Sadr, Alireza es
dc.contributor.author Nikazar, Saeedeh es
dc.contributor.author Milani, Morteza es
dc.date.accessioned 2017-07-26T11:20:32Z
dc.date.available 2017-07-26T11:20:32Z
dc.date.issued 2011 es
dc.identifier.citation Kimyai, Soodabeh ; Lotfipour, Farzaneh ; Pourabbas, Reza ; Sadr, Alireza ; Nikazar, Saeedeh ; Milani, Morteza. Effect of two prophylaxis methods on adherence of Streptococcus mutans to microfilled composite resin and giomer surfaces. En: Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa, 16 4 2011: 20- es
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10550/60140
dc.description.abstract Objectives: Surface attributes of a restoration play an important role in adherence of plaque bacteria. Prophylaxis methods may be involved in modification of or damaging the restoration surface. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of two prophylaxis methods on adherence of Streptococcus mutans to the surface of two restorative materials. Study design: A total of 60 specimens were prepared from each material; a microfilled composite resin (HelioProgress) and a giomer (Beautifil II). For each material, the specimens were randomly divided into three groups (n=20). Group 1: no prophylaxis treatment (control); Group 2: prophylaxis with pumice and rubber cup; Group 3: prophylaxis with air-powder polishing device (APD). The surfaces of selected specimens from each group were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM), and the surface topography formed by the two prophylaxis methods was determined by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Adherence of Streptococcus mutans to the surface of specimens was determined by the plate counting method following immersion in a bacterial innoculum for 4 hours, rinsing and sonication. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test for multiple comparisons. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Results: Bacterial adherence was significantly affected by both factors: restorative material type and prophylaxis method (P<0.0005). Mean bacterial adhesion was significantly higher in composite groups compared to corresponding giomer groups. Within each material, bacterial adherence was significantly lower in the control group compared to prophylaxis groups. Prophylaxis with pumice and rubber cup resulted in a significantly lower bacterial adherence compared to prophylaxis with APD. Conclusions: Based on the results of the present study, giomer specimens demonstrated lower bacterial adherence compared to composite resin specimens. In both materials, the highest bacterial adherence was observed with prophylaxis with APD, pumice and rubber cup and the control group, respectively. © Medicina Oral S. L. es
dc.title Effect of two prophylaxis methods on adherence of Streptococcus mutans to microfilled composite resin and giomer surfaces es
dc.type journal article es_ES
dc.subject.unesco UNESCO::CIENCIAS MÉDICAS es
dc.identifier.doi 10.4317/medoral.16.e561 es
dc.type.hasVersion VoR es_ES

Visualització       (1.069Mb)

Aquest element apareix en la col·lecció o col·leccions següent(s)

Mostra el registre parcial de l'element

Cerca a RODERIC

Cerca avançada

Visualitza

Estadístiques