<sec><title>Aim:</title><p> The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the synergistic effect of chemical degradation (erosion) and three-body abrasion (mechanical degradation) on the surface roughness (Ra) and hardness (KHN) of two nanorestorative materials and two conventional materials.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods:</title><p> Disc-shaped specimens (5 mm in diameter, 2 mm thick) of Filtek Z350^TM and TPH Spectrum^TM composites and Ketac Nano^TM and Vitremer^TM light-curing glass ionomer cements, nanomaterials and conventional materials were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions. After 24 h, polishing procedures were performed and initial measurements of Ra and KHN were taken in all specimens. The specimens were divided into 12 groups (n = 10) according to material and storage media: artificial saliva, orange juice, and Coca-Cola(r). After 30 days of storage, the specimens were submitted to mechanical degradation and re-evaluated for Ra and KHN. Data were tested for significant differences by repeated-measure three-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (p<0.05).</p></sec><sec><title>Results:</title><p> Erosion and abrasion wear significantly decreased hardness of all materials. Only Filtek Z350 roughness, however, was not affected by erosion and abrasion. All materials showed a significant increase in surface roughness after erosion and abrasion, except for Filtek Z350. After chemical and mechanical degradation, the KHN of all samples had decreased significantly. After mechanical degradation, the acidic drinks (Coca-Cola(r) and orange juice) were more aggressive than artificial saliva to all materials.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusions:</title><p> A synergistic effect was observed by the increase in roughness for all materials, except for Filtek Z350; hardness values decrease for all materials, regardless of whether they were nanofilled or not. The RMGICs were more susceptible to degradation than the composites, considering both hardness and roughness surface parameters.</p></sec>

Este estudo avaliou a influência de diferentes combinações de materiais usados na técnica de selamento dentinário (TSD) sobre a adaptação marginal de restaurações indiretas, cujas margens gengivais localizam-se em esmalte (ME) ou cemento (MC). Oitenta terceiros molares foram selecionados e duas cavidades foram preparadas em cada dente, as quais foram distribuídas em 16 grupos. As cavidades com margem em esmalte foram forradas pelas seguintes combinações de materiais: G1: Single-Bond2 (Sb2), G2: Sb2 + Bond/Scotchbond-Multipurpose (Sb2B), G3: Sb2 + Filtek-Flow Z350 (Sb2Fl), G4: Scotchbond-Multipurpose (SBMP), G5: Clearfil-S3 (CS3), G6: CS3 + Bond/Clearfil-SE Bond (CSE3B), G7: CS3 + Protect Liner F (CS3PL), G8: Clearfil SE Bond + Protect Liner F (CSEBPL). As mesmas combinações foram aplicadas às cavidades com margens em cemento: G9, G10, G11, G12, G13, G14, G15, G16, respectivamente. As restaurações foram confeccionadas usando o sistema Sinfony (3M/ESPE). Após 24 h, os dentes restaurados foram submetidos à ciclagem térmica (2.000 ciclos - 5° a 55° C) e mecânica (50.000 ciclos, 50 N). Em seguida, Carie-Detector (Kuraray) foi aplicado sobre as margens das restaurações. As imagens obtidas da margem proximal foram avaliadas pelo software Image-Tool 3.0. Os resultados foram submetidos aos testes estatísticos ANOVA e Tukey (p<0,05). As médias (%) observadas para os grupos foram: ME: G1=46,68, G2=15,53, G3=19,83, G4=27,53; G5=59,49, G6=25,13, G7=34,37 e G8=15,20; MC: G9=38,38, G10=23,25, G11=26,97, G12=25,85, G13=37,81, G14=30,62, G15=29,17, G16=20,31. Os maiores valores de desadaptação marginal encontrados em ME e MC foram encontrados nos grupos que não utilizaram um "liner". Desta forma, pôde-se concluir que a combinação mais apropriada para a TSD é aquela que faz uso do "liner"

This study evaluated the influence of material combinations used in the resin coating technique (RCT) on the marginal adaptation of indirect restorations with gingival margins in enamel (EM) and cement (CM). Eighty third-molars were used. Two cavities were prepared in each tooth. The cavities were distributed into 16 groups. Cavities with EM were filled with the following material combinations: G1: Single-Bond 2 (Sb2), G2: Sb2 + Bond/Scotchbond-Multipurpose (Sb2B), G3: Sb2 + Filtek-Flow Z350 (Sb2Fl), G4: Scotchbond-Multipurpose (SBMP), G5: Clearfil-S3 (CS3), G6: CS3 + Bond/Clearfil-SE Bond (CSE3B), G7: CS3 + Protect Liner F (CS3PL) and G8: Clearfil SE Bond + Protect Liner F (CSEBPL). The same combinations were applied to the cavities in CM: G9, G10, G11, G12, G13, G14, G15, G16, respectively. The fillings were performed with the Sinfony-System (3M/ESPE). After 24 h, the teeth were submitted to thermocycling (2,000 cycles, 5° to 55°C) and load-cycling (50,000 cycles, 50 N). Next, the Caries-Detector (Kuraray) was applied to the restoration margins. Images from the proximal margin were evaluated using the Image-Tool 3.0 software. The results were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The mean values (%) for the groups were: EM: G1=46.68, G2=15.53, G3=19.83, G4=27.53; G5=59.49, G6=25.13, G7=34.37, G8=15.20; CM: G9=38.38, G10=23.25, G11=26.97, G12=25.85, G13=37.81, G14=30.62, G15=29.17, G16=20.31. The highest percentages of marginal gap on EM or CM were found in the groups that did not use a liner. It can be concluded that the most appropriate RCT combinations were the groups that used a liner.

O estudo avaliou a profundidade de polimerização de um cimento resinoso dual, através da dureza Knoop (KHN), ativado em diferentes distâncias e espessuras de compósito resinoso. A dentina bovina foi planificada e embutida em resina, coberta com filme de PVC, onde um molde (0,8 mm x 5 mm) sobreposto foi preenchido com cimento e coberto com outro filme de PVC. A fotoativação (40 s) foi realizada através de discos de compósito (2, 3, 4 ou 5 mm-espessura) com a luz a 0, 1, 2 ou 3 mm de distância da superfície do compósito. Após armazenagem, os espécimes foram seccionados e a KHN medida (superfície, centro e base). Os dados foram submetidos à ANOVA com parcelas subdivididas e teste de Tukey (a=0.05). A espessura do compósito diminuiu a dureza do cimento. O aumento da distância de fotoativação diminuiu a dureza na superfície do cimento. Espécimes mostraram menores valores de dureza na região de base e os maiores valores no centro. A dureza do cimento resinoso foi influenciada pela espessura da restauração indireta e pela distância entre a ponta da unidade fotoativadora e a superfície do cimento resinoso.

This study evaluated the Knoop hardness and polymerization depth of a dual-cured resin cement, light-activated at different distances through different thicknesses of composite resin. One bovine incisor was embedded in resin and its buccal surface was flattened. Dentin was covered with PVC film where a mold (0.8-mm-thick and 5 mm diameter) was filled with cement and covered with another PVC film. Light curing (40 s) was carried out through resin discs (2, 3, 4 or 5 mm) with a halogen light positioned 0, 1, 2 or 3 mm from the resin surface. After storage, specimens were sectioned for hardness measurements (top, center, and bottom). Data were subjected to split-plot ANOVA and Tukey's test (a=0.05). The increase in resin disc thickness decreased cement hardness. The increase in the distance of the light-curing tip decreased hardness at the top region. Specimens showed the lowest hardness values at the bottom, and the highest at the center. Resin cement hardness was influenced by the thickness of the indirect restoration and by the distance between the light-curing unit tip and the resin cement surface.