In vitro abrasion of two acrylic veneers.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this investigation was to compare the degree of abrasion in vitro of two acrylic veneers and dental enamel using a dentifrice with and without fluoride.


METHODS
Ten specimens of each of the two acrylics and enamel were embedded in resin, and eventually polished to 1 micron with diamond paste. Specimens were brushed in a brushing machine with 10,000 double strokes using a dentifrice (Solidox, A/S Denofa) with and without fluoride. The abrasion was evaluated by the naked eye, by photographs and measured by means of profilometer.


RESULTS
One of the polymer materials (Dentacolor, Kulzer) showed a significantly higher resistance to abrasion than the other (Biodent, DeTrey), irrespective of fluoride treatment. Brushing with or without fluoride revealed no significant difference in degree of abrasion between the two acrylic materials. Dentacolor showed significantly higher abrasion resistance than enamel, whereas Biodent did not. There was no significant difference in the degree of abrasion of enamel using dentifrice with or without fluoride.


CONCLUSIONS
Abrasion of acrylic veneering material differed greatly between brands, but did not seem to be influenced by the fluoride in toothpaste.
Ambjørnsen
E
E
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, University of Oslo, Norway.
Holland
R I
RI
D003188:Composite Resins; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D003801:Dental Veneers; D005459:Fluorides; D006244:Hardness; D008422:Materials Testing; D008689:Methacrylates; D019279:Resin Cements; D012821:Silanes; D013499:Surface Properties; D014099:Toothbrushing; D014100:Toothpastes
D003188:Composite Resins; D008689:Methacrylates; D019279:Resin Cements; D012821:Silanes; D014100:Toothpastes; D003776:Dental Porcelain; C058237:Biodent; C057365:Dentacolor; D005459:Fluorides