RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate nanosized eggshell-titanium dioxide (EB@TiO2) abrasiveness in comparison with calcium carbonate and hydrated silica-containing toothpaste. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-five bovine tooth enamels were prepared, and specimens randomly assigned to a sample group of five (n = 7), namely, Colgate regular, Colgate pro-relief, Sensodyne rapid relief, Sensodyne repair, and EB@TiO2. Half of the enamel surface was brushed with each respective sample group, while the other half was covered with a tap. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The mean roughness value (Ra) of the brushed and covered halves were measured using an atomic force microscope (AFM). To assess the surface morphology and changes, a scanning electron microscope (SEM) was performed. Using pair sample test and ANOVA, the Ra for the entire specimens were analyzed. A Bonferroni correction was used to identify the mean differences among the five groups (α=.05). RESULTS: The findings from this analysis show that all the tested toothpaste abraded the enamel significantly (p < 0.05). The abrasive value contained in toothpaste comprising calcium carbonate was lower than the silica toothpaste hydrated. CONCLUSION: Overall, Colgate regular had the lowest toothpaste abrasivity, followed by EB@TiO2, while Sensodyne rapid relief had the most enamel wear. The prominent feature of this study suggests that EB@TiO2 is suitable for oral use, as its abrasivity is comparable with calcium carbonate-containing toothpaste.
RESUMEN
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1155/2018/4216415.].
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Enamel erosion caused by high consumption of acidic drinks poses a significant public health concern. This study was aimed to determine the protective effect of eggshell-titanium dioxide composite (EB@TiO2) against erosive acids on tooth enamel. METHODS: Twenty prepared bovine tooth enamel specimens were randomly assigned to 5 sample groups (n=4): (1) unexposed tooth enamel; (2) exposed tooth enamel + HCI; (3) exposed tooth enamel + HCI + Colgate toothpaste; (4) exposed tooth enamel + HCI + Sensodyne toothpaste; and (5) exposed tooth enamel + HCI + EB@TiO2. The mean roughness value (R rms) of the exposed and unexposed tooth was measured with atomic force microscope (AFM). Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and Raman spectroscopy techniques were used to evaluate the surface morphology and changes. ANOVA was used to analyze the mean square roughness (R rms) values for all specimens. Bonferonni correction was used to identify the mean differences among the 5 groups (α=0.05). The R rms values measured for the unexposed and exposed specimens in HCI alone were statistically significant (P < 0.05). RESULTS: No significant differences were found for the unexposed and exposed specimens in HCI + toothpaste and EB@TiO2. The tooth enamel specimens exposed to HCI + Sensodyne had the highest R rms values, while specimens exposed to HCI + EB@TiO2 had the lowest R rms values. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the investigated toothpaste provides protection against acidic substances. The study results further suggests that EB@TiO2 could be used to provide enhanced protection for tooth enamel.
