Effect of two anti-erosion pastes on surface roughness of different restorative materials.

AIM The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of two antierosive pastes, Pronamel and Tooth Mousse Plus, on surface roughness of two composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra Universal Restorative and TPH Spectrum Restorative), one compomer (Dyract Extra), and two conventional glass ionomer restorative materials (Ionofil U and SDI) MATERIALS AND METHODS STUDY DESIGN: 14 discs (10 mm diameter x 2 mm thickness) were prepared for each material (n =14 x 5). The discs were randomly divided into two groups to receive either GC Tooth Mousse Plus application or Sensodyne Pronamel application with toothbrush. The surface roughness of the brushed samples were recorded by laser profilometer. STATISTICS Wilcoxon, Kruskal Wallis test and multiple comparison tests were used to analyse the data. RESULTS It was revealed that the surface roughness of the Filtek Supreme, TPH, Dyract and Riva Selfcure materials were not affected from application of either pastes (p>0.005). However, surface roughness of manually mixed glass ionomer (Ionofil U) was significantly increased when brushed with both Tooth Mousse and Pronamel paste (p<0.001). CONCLUSION Neither Pronamel, nor Tooth Mousse caused a significant change on the surface roughness of tested restorative materials except Ionofil U. It was significantly increased following brushing with either paste.