Effects of Different Pediatric Drugs on the Color Stability of Various Restorative Materials Applicable in Pediatric Dentistry

Abstract

Background. The chronic recommendation of pediatric drugs could exhibit erosive and cariogenic problems. Objective. To evaluate the effects of different pediatric drugs on the color stability of various restorative materials. Methods. Five specimens (1 mm × 3 mm) were prepared and immersed in ten different pediatric drugs and agitated every 8 hours daily for 2 min up to 1 week. Between immersion periods, the samples were stored in artificial saliva. After 1-week period, ΔE⁎ values were calculated. Two-way ANOVA and Fisher's LSD test were used for statistical analysis at a level of p < 0.05. Results. ΔE⁎ values were only significantly influenced by restorative material factor (p < 0.001) and varied in the range of 2.08 and 6.55 units for all drugs/restorative materials. The highest ΔE⁎ was found in Ferrosanol B-composite (6.55 ± 1.38) and the lowest one was found in Dolven-glass ionomer (2.08 ± 0.40) pairwise. The most prominent ΔE⁎ value elevations were obtained in composite material compared to the compomer and/or glass ionomers in Macrol, Ferrosanol B, and Ventolin (p < 0.001; for all) and also for other drugs (p < 0.05). Dolven exhibited significantly higher values compared to Augmentin (p = 0.021), Macrol (p = 0.018), and Ventolin (p = 0.013) in compomer group. Conclusion. The clinically perceptible color changes for tested composite/pediatric drug pairwise can be more problematic than compomer and glass ionomers in pediatric dentistry.

The Effects of Different Pediatric Drugs and Brushing on the Color Stability of Esthetic Restorative Materials Used in Pediatric Dentistry: An In Vitro Study

“…In contrast to our findings, previous studies evaluating the color stability of pediatric restorative materials showed that the composite is the least color-stable material [ 12 , 20 , 28 , 33 ]. Our results show that a significant change in color in the amoxicillin composite, amoxicillin GIC, and ventolin GIC groups, which is inconsistent with the results of previous studies, might be due to a variety of factors, including the presence or absence of the brushing component, the difference in the experiment’s duration, the medications utilized and their pH levels, the brands of the materials used, or the surface roughness.…”

“…To avoid air entrapment and voids, a cellulose acetate matrix strip was placed over the ring and held between two 1 mm thick glass slides. Three restorative materials were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions [ 28 ]. The compomer specimens were polymerized by applying a light-emitting diode (LED) polymerization light (3M ESPE Dental, Dublin, Ireland) of 1200 mW/cm 2 to each surface for 20 s, with the tip of the light unit on the glass slide (0 mm away from the specimen).…”

“…The measurements were obtained using the CIEDE2000 (Δ E ) system. Δ E was calculated using the following formula [ 28 ]: Δ E ( L * a * b *) = ([Δ L *]2 + [Δ a *]2 + [Δ b *]2) 1/2 where Δ L * is the difference between the L * values, Δ a * is the difference between the a * values, and Δ b * is the difference between the b * values.…”

An experimental study on the effect of four pediatric drug types on color stability in different tooth-colored restorative materials

“…In another study, Afzali assessed the effect of ingested liquids on the color change of composite resin; unlike the present investigation, they concluded that the discoloration values did not depend on the type of staining solution. [ 26 ]…”

Effect of pediatric multivitamin syrups and effervescent tablets on the surface microhardness and roughness of restorative materials: An in vitro study

“…The only study which involves the effect of pediatric syrup multivitamins on glass ionomer cements evaluated color stability. 19 Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of two different pediatric multivitamin syrups and effervescent tablets taken daily for 28 days on the surface microhardness and roughness of two different restorative materials.…”