These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Adhesion of oral microorganisms on dental porcelain polished and glazed].
    Author: Wang YN, Wen GJ, Shi B, Pan XH.
    Journal: Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2003 Sep; 38(5):342-4. PubMed ID: 14680580.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: This study compared the roughness of porcelain polished or glazed surfaces and the adhesion of oral streptococcus mutans to them in vitro. METHODS: 30 porcelain samples were made. Porcelain samples in group A were polished with diamond paste. Porcelain samples were glazed in group B and were polished with Al2O3 (240#) bur in group C. Their roughness values were measured by profilometer. Standardized cell suspensions were incubated with test samples for one hour at 37 degrees C, then retained cells were counted by image analysis (percentage area of a microscopic field covered by cells). RESULTS: Roughness values of group A, B, C were respectively (0.1987 +/- 0.057) microm, (0.1990 +/- 0.091) microm, (0.4260 +/- 0.174) microm. There was no significantly difference between group A and group B. The roughness samples in group C were significantly rougher than that in the other groups. The amount of retained cells in group A, group B, group C was respectively (15.92 +/- 4.37)%, (16.39 +/- 6.31)% and (41.48 +/- 12.1)%. There was no significant difference between the cell adhesion on porcelain surface glazed and polished, but more bacteria adhered on the porcelain surface in group C. CONCLUSIONS: Porcelain surface polished treatment was clinically acceptable compared with its glazed. They all exhibited the least amount of bacteria adhesion. The more porcelain surface was rough, the more bacteria adhered on it.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]