The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 5 ( May, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

The Gloss Retention of Esthetic Restorations Following Simulated Brushing with Charcoal Oral Products: An In-Vitro Study

Nancy S Farghal, Fadia Awadalkreem, Nadin A Abouelhonoud, Raiyan I Khan

Keywords : Charcoal toothbrush, Charcoal toothpaste, Esthetic restorative materials, Gloss, Simulated brushing

Citation Information : Farghal NS, Awadalkreem F, Abouelhonoud NA, Khan RI. The Gloss Retention of Esthetic Restorations Following Simulated Brushing with Charcoal Oral Products: An In-Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (5):473-479.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3692

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 05-08-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: To assess the gloss and gloss retention of two esthetic restorative materials after brushing with a charcoal-infused toothbrush and activated charcoal toothpaste compared to their standard counterparts in all possible combinations. Materials and methods: In this study,104 disc-shaped specimens were prepared, 52 from each of the two materials: Beautifil II LS composite resin (Giomer) and Fuji II LC resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI). Specimens of each material were divided into 4 groups (n = 13) according to the tested brushing procedure: group A—standard toothbrush + standard non-whitening toothpaste (S-S), group B—standard toothbrush + activated charcoal toothpaste (S-CH), group C—charcoal-infused toothbrush + standard non-whitening toothpaste (CH-S), and group D—charcoal-infused toothbrush + activated-charcoal toothpaste (CH-CH). Gloss was recorded using a gloss meter initially and after each brushing protocol. The data were statistically analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD post hoc tests using SPSS® v.27 software at 5% significance level. Results: Beautifil II LS showed the highest gloss values after brushing in group D (44 ± 3.9), which was not significantly different from its initial value (46.1 ± 1.8), followed by groups A (32.2 ± 4), B (23.2 ± 3.6), and C (22.7 ± 3.9), while Fuji II LC showed its highest gloss values after brushing in groups D (16.6 ± 3.7) and a (15.4 ± 8.7), followed by groups C (10.9 ± 6) and B (4.4 ± 2.5), all were significantly lower than their respective initial gloss values. Conclusion: The gloss of Giomer and RMGI reduced significantly following the brushing with the tested brushing procedures except for the Giomer group brushed with a combination of charcoal-infused toothbrush and activated-charcoal toothpaste. Clinical significance: The brushing using a combination of charcoal-infused toothbrush and activated-charcoal toothpaste is recommended for the gloss retention of Beautifil II LS restorations. However, the gloss of the Fuji II LC cannot be retained after any of the brushing procedures.

PDF Share
  1. Reddy PS, Tejaswi KL, Shetty S, et al. Effects of commonly consumed beverages on surface roughness and color stability of the nano, microhybrid and hybrid composite resins: An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(4):718–723. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1390.
  2. Šarić D, Sole AS. Visually significant dimensions and parameters for gloss. J Imaging 2023;10(1). DOI: 10.3390/jimaging10010010.
  3. Molina GF, Cabral RJ, Mazzola I, et al. Surface gloss, gloss retention, and color stability of 2 nano-filled universal resin composites. Restor Dent Endod 2022;47(4):e43. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2022.47.e43.
  4. Keyf F, Etikan I. Evaluation of gloss changes of two denture acrylic resin materials in four different beverages. Dent Mater 2004;20(3):244–251. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(03)00099-X.
  5. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Kulunk S, et al. The effect of polishing techniques on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96(1):33–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006. 04.012.
  6. Jacob G, Goud KM. A comparative study on microleakage of two low shrinkage composite materials in Class II cavities: A stereomicroscopic analysis. J Conserv Dent 2023;26(1):83–87. DOI:10.4103/jcd.jcd_444_22
  7. Vance M, Lawson NC, Rupal M, et al. Color and gloss of nano-filled resin-modified glass ionomers and resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27(5):293–299. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12118.
  8. Koc Vural U, Bagdatli Z, Yilmaz AE, et al. Effects of charcoal-based whitening toothpastes on human enamel in terms of color, surface roughness, and microhardness: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2021;25(10):5977–5985. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-03903-x.
  9. Franco MC, Uehara J, Meroni BM, et al. The effect of a charcoal-based powder for enamel dental bleaching. Oper Dent 2020;45(6):618–623. DOI: 10.2341/19-122-L.
  10. Zhao Y, Choi JW, Lin S, et al. Experimental and QSAR studies on adsorptive interaction of anionic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with activated-charcoal. Chemosphere 2018;212:620–628. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.08.115.
  11. Nayyer M, Zahid S, Hassan SH, et al. Comparative abrasive wear resistance and surface analysis of dental resin-based materials. Eur J Dent 2018;12(1):57–66. DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_380_17.
  12. Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Ohmiti K, et al. Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load. Dent Mater 2010;26(4):306–319. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.152.
  13. Kamonkhantikul K, Arksornnukit M, Takahashi H, et al. Polishing and toothbrushing alters the surface roughness and gloss of composite resins. Dent Mater J 2014;33(5):599–606. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2014-111.
  14. Sugiyama T, Kameyama A, Enokuchi T, et al. Effect of professional dental prophylaxis on the surface gloss and roughness of CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Clin Exp Dent 2017;9(6):e772–e778. DOI: 10.4317/jced.53826.
  15. Jassé FF, de Campos EA, Lefever D, et al. Influence of filler charge on gloss of composite materials before and after in vitro toothbrushing. J Dent 2013;41 Suppl 5:e41–e44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.04.011.
  16. Greuling A, Emke JM, Eisenburger M. Abrasion behaviour of different charcoal toothpastes when using electric toothbrushes. Dent J (Basel) 2021;9(8). DOI: 10.3390/dj9080097.
  17. Kim MJ, Lee MJ, Kim KM, et al. Enamel demineralization resistance and remineralization by various fluoride-releasing dental restorative materials. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(16). DOI: 10.3390/ma14164554.
  18. de Melo TP, Delgado A, Martins R, et al. Can specular gloss measurements predict the effectiveness of finishing/polishing protocols in dental polymers? A systematic review and linear mixed-effects prediction model. Oper Dent 2022;47(3):e131–e151. DOI: 10.2341/21-027-LIT.
  19. Aydın N, Karaoglanoglu S, Oktay EA. Investigation of the effects of whitening toothpastes on color change of resin-based CAD/CAM blocks. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(6):884–890. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12627.
  20. Barakah HM, Taher NM. Effect of polishing systems on stain susceptibility and surface roughness of nanocomposite resin material. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(3):625–631. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.007.
  21. da Costa JB, Ferracane JL, Amaya-Pajares S, et al. Visually acceptable gloss threshold for resin composite and polishing systems. J Am Dent Assoc 2021;152(5):385–392. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2020.09.027.
  22. Rodrigues-Junior SA, Chemin P, Piaia PP, et al. Surface roughness and gloss of actual composites as polished with different polishing systems. Oper Dent 2015;40(4):418–429. DOI: 10.2341/14-014L.
  23. Hosoya Y, Shiraishi T, Odatsu T, et al. Effects of polishing on surface roughness, gloss, and color of resin composites. J Oral Sci 2011;53(3):283–291. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.53.283.
  24. Müller JA, Rohr N, Fischer J. Evaluation of ISO 4049: water sorption and water solubility of resin cements. Eur J Oral Sci 2017;125(2):141–150. DOI: 10.1111/eos.12339.
  25. Lefever D, Krejci I, Ardu S. Laboratory evaluation of the effect of toothbrushing on surface gloss of resin composites. Am J Dent 2014;27(1):42–46. PMID: 24902404.
  26. Yu P, Yang SM, Xu YX, et al. Surface roughness and gloss alteration of polished resin composites with various filler types after simulated toothbrush abrasion. J Dent Sci 2023;18(3):1016–1022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.12.004.
  27. Gupta VK, Ali I, Saini VK. Defluoridation of wastewaters using waste carbon slurry. Water Res 2007;41(15):3307–3316. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.04.029.
  28. Vaz VTP, Jubilato DP, Oliveira MRM, et al. Whitening toothpaste containing activated-charcoal, blue covarine, hydrogen peroxide or microbeads: Which one is the most effective? J Appl Oral Sci 2019;27:e20180051. DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0051.
  29. Turssi CP, Kelly AB, Hara AT. Toothbrush bristle configuration and brushing load: Effect on the development of simulated non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 2019;86:75–80. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.05.026.
  30. Tavas B, Celiksoz O, Tepe H, et al. The effect of whitening toothpastes on the color stability of a smart monochromatic composite resin. Cureus 2023;15(9):e46225. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46225.
  31. Osmanaj N, Petersen S, Eisenburger M, et al. Abrasion behavior of different charcoal toothpastes on human dentin when using electric toothbrushes. Dent J (Basel). 2022;10(3):46. DOI: 10.3390/dj10030046.
  32. Matroja J, Talreja P, Rao P. A profilometric study to assess the role of non-coated and four different types of coated toothbrushes in the abrasion process on enamel surface: An in-vitro study. J Biomed Eng 2023;40(3):135–146. DOI: 10.105515/JBE.40.3.19.
  33. Pertiwi UI, Eriwati YK, Irawan B. Surface changes of enamel after brushing with charcoal toothpaste. J Physics 2017;884(1):012002. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/884/1/012002.
  34. Komandla DR, Acharya SR, Pentapati KC. Comparative evaluation of surface roughness of resin-modified glass ionomer and glass hybrid restorative materials simulated by tooth brushing: An in-vitro study. Pesq Bras Odont Clín Integ 2021;21. DOI: 10.1590/pboci.2021.149.
  35. Carvalho FG, Sampaio CS, Fucio SB, et al. Effect of chemical and mechanical degradation on surface roughness of three glass ionomers and a nanofilled resin composite. Oper Dent 2012;37(5):509–517. DOI: 10.2341/10-406-L.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.