Uticaj različitih sredstava za ispiranje usta na jačinu veze gleđi sa univerzalnim adhezivnim sistemom
Sažetak
Uvod/Cilj. Iako sredstva za ispiranje usta koja sadrže eterična ulja imaju određene prednosti, nije dovoljno poznato kakav efekat ona imaju na jačinu veze gleđi sa univerzalnim adhezivnim sistemom. Cilj rada bio je da se proceni uticaj sredstava za ispiranje usta koja sadrže esencijalno ulje na jačinu veze gleđi sa univerzalnim adhezivnim sistemom. Metode. U istraživanju je korišćeno 96 goveđih sekutića. Zubi su podeljeni u četiri različite grupe prema kontrolnoj grupi i tri različita sredstva za ispiranje usta: Grupa I (Kontrolna) – destilovana voda, Grupa II – Listerine Cool Mint (sredstvo za ispiranje usta sa esencijalnim uljem), Grupa III – Kloroben (0,12% hlorheksidin glukonat u sredstvu za ispiranje usta) i Grupa IV – Oxyfresh (0,05% natrijum-fluorid u sredstvu za ispiranje usta). Prema načinu nanošenja univerzalnog lepka adheziva (protokol nagrizanja i ispiranja ili protokol samonagrizanja), svaka grupa je podeljena u dve podgrupe (n =12). Sredstva za ispiranje usta svakodnevno su se nanosila u trajanju od 30 sekundi na površine gleđi tokom mesec dana, a uzorci su zatim potapani u destilovanu vodu. Nakon ispitivanja „čvrstoće smicanja“, primenom univerzalne ispitne test mašine, pri brzini od 1 mm/min, dobijeni podaci su statistički analizirani (p = 0,05). Rezultati. Dvosmernim ANOVA testom pokazano je da ispiranje usta nije uticalo na jačinu veze gleđi sa univerzalnim adhezivom, ali je zato način nanošenja značajno uticao. Zaključak. Korišćenje sredstva za ispiranje usta koje sadrži esencijalno ulje, kao i drugih sredstava za ispiranje usta testiranih u ovom istraživanju, pokazalo se bezbedno u pogledu kvaliteta veze gleđi i ispitivanog adheziva.
Reference
1. Zewdu T, Abu D, Agajie M, Sahilu T. Dental caries and associated factors in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Prev Med 2021; 26(1): 21.
2. Parkinson CR, Hara AT, Nehme M, Lippert F, Zero DT. A randomised clinical evaluation of a fluoride mouthrinse and dentifrice in an in situ caries model. J Dent 2018; 70: 59–66.
3. Murthy AK, Fareed N. Economic evaluation of school-based caries preventive programs: A systematic review. Community Dent Health 2020; 37(3): 205–15
4. Charugundla BR, Anjum S, Mocherla M. Comparative effect of fluoride, essential oil and chlorhexidine mouth rinses on dental plaque and gingivitis in patients with and without dental caries: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Dent Hyg 2015; 13(2): 104–9.
5. Jassoma E, Baeesa L, Sabbagh H. The antiplaque/anticariogenic efficacy of Salvadora persica (Miswak) mouthrinse in comparison to that of chlorhexidine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health 2019; 19(1): 64.
6. Cortelli JR, Cogo K, Aquino DR, Cortelli SC, Ricci-Nittel D, Zhang P, et al. Validation of the anti-bacteremic efficacy of an essential oil rinse in a Brazilian population: a cross-over study. Braz Oral Res 2012; 26(5): 478‒84.
7. Mankodi S, Ross NM, Mostler K. Clinical efficacy of listerine in inhibiting and reducing plaque and experimental gingivitis. J Clin Periodontol 1987; 14(5): 285–8.
8. Amini P, Araujo MWB, Wu MM, Charles CA, Sharma NC. Comparative antiplaque and antigingivitis efficacy of three antiseptic mouthrinses: a two week randomized clinical trial. Braz Oral Res 2009; 23(3): 319–25.
9. Pan P, Barnett ML, Coelho J, Brogdon C, Finnegan MB. Determination of the in situ bactericidal activity of an essential oil mouthrinse using a vital stain method. J Clin Periodontol 2000; 27(4): 256–61.
10. Zheng CY, Wang ZH. Effects of chlorhexidine, listerine and fluoride listerine mouthrinses on four putative root-caries pathogens in the biofilm. Chin J Dent Res 2011; 14: 135–40.
11. Pereira JR, Pamato S, Vargas M, Junior NF. State of the Art of Dental Adhesive Systems. Curr Drug Deliv 2018; 15(5): 610–9.
12. Rosa WL, de O da Piva E, Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015; 43(7): 765–76.
13. Nakamichi I, Iwaku M, Fusayama T. Bovine teeth as possible substitutes in the adhesion test. J Dent Res 1983; 62(10): 1076‒81.
14. Reis AF, Giannini M, Kavaguchi A, Soares CJ, Line SR. Comparison of microtensile bond strength to enamel and dentin of human, bovine, and porcine teeth. J Adhes Dent 2004; 6(2): 117–21.
15. Pouyanfar H, Tabaii ES, Aghazadeh S, Nobari SPTN, Imani MM. Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite to Enamel Using Universal Adhesive with/without Acid Etching Compared To Etch and Rinse and Self-Etch Bonding Agents. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2018; 6(11): 2186–92.
16. McLean DE, Meyers EJ, Guillory VL, Vandewalle KS. Enamel Bond Strength of New Universal Adhesive Bonding Agents. Oper Dent 2015; 40(4): 410–7.
17. Suzuki T, Takamizawa T, Barkmeier WW, Tsujimoto A, Endo H, Erickson RL, et al. Influence of Etching Mode on Enamel Bond Durability of Universal Adhesive Systems. Oper Dent 2016; 41(5): 520–30.
18. Sharpe AN. Influence of the crystal orientation in human enamel on its reactivity to acid as shown by high resolution microradiography. Arch Oral Biol 1967; 12(5): 583–92.
19. Elzuhery H, Ola Ibrahim F, Inas AE, Mohamed AE, Ali IA. Bond strength and morphological interface of self-etching adhesives to demineralized and remineralized enamel. J Dent Sci 2013; 8(3): 287‒95.
20. Lindemuth JS, Hagge MS. Effect of universal testing machine crosshead speed on the shear bond strength and bonding failure mode of composite resin to enamel and dentin. Mil Med 2000; 165(10): 742‒6.
21. Demir A, Malkoc S, Sengun A, Koyuturk AE, Sener Y. Effects of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine mouth rinses on the bond strength of an orthodontic composite. Angle Orthod 2005; 75(3): 392–6.