Background This study aimed to compare the effects of charcoal-containing, hydrogen peroxide-containing, and abrasive whitening toothpastes on color stability of a resin composite. Methods Forty-five specimens were fabricated of spectrum TPH3 composite resin and stored in artificial saliva for 24 h. Baseline color assessment was performed using a spectrophotometer device. Then, the specimens were randomly assigned into 5 experimental groups, namely distilled water (GC), Bencer (GB), colgate optic white (GO), perfect white black (GP) and colgate total whitening (GT) toothpastes. The specimens immersed in coffee solution for 10 min and brushed for 1 min with respective toothpaste and then stored in artificial saliva until the next day. This cycle was repeated for 30 days. After 30 days, the final color assessment was performed using the spectrophotometer. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests. Results Experimental groups were not significantly different in terms of Δa and ΔE values. However, ΔL and Δb values showed significant difference among the groups. Regarding Δa, GT and GC groups showed red color shift while the other groups showed green color shift. Regarding Δb, all groups showed blue color shift except GT group which showed yellow color shift. Conclusion None of the whitening toothpastes could decrease discoloration caused by the coffee solution to the level below the perceptibility threshold except Colgate Optic White which reduced discoloration within the clinically acceptable perceptibility range.

No abstract

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the protective effects of fluoride mouthwash on the surface micro-hardness of two types of CAD/CAM ceramics after exposure to acidic solutions. Methods 40 samples (5 × 5 × 3 mm3) were prepared from two different ceramics: Vitabloc Mark II CAD, and IPS e.max CAD. The samples were randomly divided into 5 groups in each ceramic (n = 8) immersed in different solutions: Gs: saliva: GGA: gastric acid, GAA: acetic acid, GFGA: sodium fluoride + gastric acid, GFAA: sodium fluoride + acetic acid. The microhardness of samples was measured before and after immersion in different solutions by Vickers microhardness tester. By subtracting the microhardness values after and before immersion, the microhardness changes of the samples were obtained. Data were analyzed by Two-way analysis of variance, one-way analysis of variance, and Tukey test (α = 0.05). Results Immersion in different solutions reduced the microhardness. Microhardness loss was significantly affected in G FAA and G FGA groups in both types of ceramics (P < 0.05). For Vitabloc Mark II groups, the microhardness loss was significantly higher in GFAA and GFGA compared to IPS e.max CAD P < 0.001). Conclusion Fluoride mouthwash in conjunction with acidic solutions may adversely affect microhardness of Vitabloc Mark II CAD, and IPS e.max CAD that may consequently compromise the clinical service. Vitabloc Mark II CAD was significantly more affected than IPS e.max CAD.

Purpose. Considering the suggested advantages of cold atmospheric plasma (CAP) in increasing the fluoride uptake by the enamel, this study aimed to assess enamel erosion following the application of helium CAP and two types of fluoride varnishes. Methods. The microhardness of 70 bovine enamel specimens was measured using a Vickers hardness tester. The specimens were randomly divided into 7 groups (n = 10): control, CAP (P), resin-containing fluoride varnish (RF), CAP + resin-containing fluoride varnish (PRF), fluoride varnish (F), CAP + fluoride varnish (PF), and erosion (E). The specimens in the control and erosion groups did not receive CAP or fluoride varnish. All specimens underwent erosive challenge 4 times/day using hydrochloric acid and artificial saliva except for the control specimens that remained in distilled water during the course of the study. After 5 days of erosive challenge, microhardness was measured again, and the percentage of microhardness change was calculated. Surface roughness of two specimens in each group was assessed by atomic force microscopy (AFM). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tamhane’s post-hoc test. Results. The percentage of microhardness change in all groups was significantly higher than that of the control group. All groups showed significantly lower percentage of microhardness change compared with the E group except for the P group; no significant difference was noted in microhardness change of P and E groups. Other experimental groups had no significant difference with each other. Surface roughness was the highest in PRF and the lowest in the F group. Conclusion. CAP application had no significant effect on increasing the enamel resistance to erosion. However, enamel resistance to erosion increased significantly after fluoride varnish application alone or fluoride varnish application combined with CAP. No significant difference was noted between the two types of varnishes in this regard. CAP increased the surface roughness while fluoride varnish application alone decreased the roughness.

Background: Dental implants have been one of the most popular treatments for rehabilitating individuals with single missing teeth or fully edentulous jaws since their introduction. As more implant patients are well-aged and take several medications due to various systemic conditions, clinicians should be mindful of possible drug implications on bone remodeling and osseointegration. Objective: The present study aims to study and review some desirable and some unwelcomed implications of medicine on osseointegration. Methods: A broad search for proper relevant studies were conducted in four databases, including Web of Science, Pubmed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Results: Some commonly prescribed medicines such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), glucocorticoids, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), anticoagulants, metformin, and chemotherapeutic agents may jeopardize osseointegration. On the contrary, some therapeutic agents such as anabolic, anti-catabolic, or dual anabolic and anti-catabolic agents may enhance osseointegration and increase the treatment’s success rate. Conclusion: Systemic medications that enhance osseointegration include mineralization promoters and bone resorption inhibitors. On the other hand, medications often given to the elderly with systemic problems might interfere with osseointegration, leading to implant failure. However, to validate the provided research, more human studies with a higher level of evidence are required.