IADR Abstract Archives
Can Energy Drinks Affect the Appearance of Bioactive Restorative Materials?
Objectives: To compare the effect of different energy drinks on surface roughness, weight loss, and color change of different bioactive restoratives.
Methods: 40 specimens of each material (Charisma Diamond One, Activa Bioactive Restorative, Activa Presto, Equia Forte; n= 160) were prepared using a plastic mold (8x2mm). Each specimen, except Equia Forte, was photo-polymerized for 20 sec using a visible light-curing unit (ZenoLite, President Dental, Germany). After Sof-Lex discs polishing (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA), specimens were immersed in different energy drinks: distilled water (control), Powerade (Coca-Cola, Atlanta GA, USA), Burn (Coca-Cola, Atlanta GA, USA) and Monster (Monster Energy Ltd, California, USA) for 7 days. The color measurements were performed with a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade, Vident, Brea, USA) and evaluated according to CIEDE2000 system. The surface roughness measurements were obtained with a profilometer (SurfTest SJ-301, Mitutoyo, Japan). An electronic balance (Pioneer PA64, Ohaus, Pine Brook, USA) was used to evaluate the specimen’s weight at baseline and after 7 days. Statistical analyses were performed by Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U tests (p< 0.05).
Results: All energy drinks significantly roughened the surfaces of Equia Forte (p<.05). Powerade and Monster increased the Ra of all bioactive materials compared to baseline (p<.05). Burn affected all the groups except Activa (p>.05). Significant weight loss was observed in Equia Forte groups after immersion in all drinks while no loss was noticed in the other groups. Burn and Monster lead to more discoloration in all the bioactive materials (p<.05). Repolishing procedures lighten the color of the materials but not to a comparable level to baseline (p<.05). The less affected bioactive material from the process was Activa.
Conclusions: Energy drinks affected in different degrees the surface roughness, weight loss, and color change of bioactive restorative materials. The most affected material was Equia Forte while the less was Activa.
Methods: 40 specimens of each material (Charisma Diamond One, Activa Bioactive Restorative, Activa Presto, Equia Forte; n= 160) were prepared using a plastic mold (8x2mm). Each specimen, except Equia Forte, was photo-polymerized for 20 sec using a visible light-curing unit (ZenoLite, President Dental, Germany). After Sof-Lex discs polishing (3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA), specimens were immersed in different energy drinks: distilled water (control), Powerade (Coca-Cola, Atlanta GA, USA), Burn (Coca-Cola, Atlanta GA, USA) and Monster (Monster Energy Ltd, California, USA) for 7 days. The color measurements were performed with a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade, Vident, Brea, USA) and evaluated according to CIEDE2000 system. The surface roughness measurements were obtained with a profilometer (SurfTest SJ-301, Mitutoyo, Japan). An electronic balance (Pioneer PA64, Ohaus, Pine Brook, USA) was used to evaluate the specimen’s weight at baseline and after 7 days. Statistical analyses were performed by Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U tests (p< 0.05).
Results: All energy drinks significantly roughened the surfaces of Equia Forte (p<.05). Powerade and Monster increased the Ra of all bioactive materials compared to baseline (p<.05). Burn affected all the groups except Activa (p>.05). Significant weight loss was observed in Equia Forte groups after immersion in all drinks while no loss was noticed in the other groups. Burn and Monster lead to more discoloration in all the bioactive materials (p<.05). Repolishing procedures lighten the color of the materials but not to a comparable level to baseline (p<.05). The less affected bioactive material from the process was Activa.
Conclusions: Energy drinks affected in different degrees the surface roughness, weight loss, and color change of bioactive restorative materials. The most affected material was Equia Forte while the less was Activa.