Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2021 Apr 13;13:121-125. doi: 10.2147/CCIDE.S306919. eCollection 2021.
Effect of Different Herbal Tea Preparations on the Color Stability of Glass Ionomer Cements.
Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry
Shehla Wasim Haque, Vidya-Saraswathi Muliya, Krishnaraj Somayaji, Kalyana-Chakravarthy Pentapati
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
- Department of Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
PMID: 33880068
PMCID: PMC8053480 DOI: 10.2147/CCIDE.S306919
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the color stability of the newer glass ionomer cements (GIC) when exposed to "Green tea" (GT), "Tulsi tea" (TT), and "Areca tea" (AT) using spectrophotometric analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected commercially available GC Fuji IX GP EXTRA and Ketac Universal for this study. Eighty disc-shaped samples were made using a mold, which were immersed in the freshly prepared test solutions (distilled water, GT, TT, and AT) for 15 minutes per day for 60 days. The color estimation was done using a spectrophotometer.
RESULTS: GC Fuji IX samples had a significantly higher mean difference in ΔE value than Ketac Universal when immersed in GT, AT, and control (P<0.001, 0.018, and <0.001), respectively. With GC Fuji IX, GT and AT stained more than TT and control solutions. Samples of Ketac Universal showed a significantly higher mean difference in ΔE values when immersed in AT, followed by GT, TT, and control.
CONCLUSION: Within the study's limitations, we conclude that both the GICs exhibited staining over time on exposure to all the test solutions. Ketac Universal demonstrated lower staining potential than GIC Fuji IX GP Extra for GT and AT.
© 2021 Haque et al.
Keywords: dental; glass ionomer cement; staining; tea
Conflict of interest statement
The authors reported no conflicts of interest for this work.
References
- Oper Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;40(2):E56-65 - PubMed
- Dent Mater. 2004 Jul;20(6):530-4 - PubMed
- J Dent. 2012 Jul;40 Suppl 1:e48-56 - PubMed
- Chin Med. 2010 Apr 06;5:13 - PubMed
- J Esthet Dent. 1999;11(6):291-310 - PubMed
- J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2009 Winter;34(2):147-50 - PubMed
- J Dent. 2005 May;33(5):389-98 - PubMed
- Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2020 Oct 13;12:423-428 - PubMed
- J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2016 Jul-Sep;34(3):233-7 - PubMed
- J Dent. 2011 Dec;39 Suppl 3:e52-6 - PubMed
- J Appl Oral Sci. 2009 Sep-Oct;17(5):364-9 - PubMed
- Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012 Jul;9(4):441-6 - PubMed
- J Int Oral Health. 2015 Jul;7(7):63-70 - PubMed
- J Dent. 2012 Jul;40 Suppl 1:e57-63 - PubMed
- Food Chem Toxicol. 2010 Dec;48(12):3412-7 - PubMed
- J Conserv Dent. 2012 Jul;15(3):283-8 - PubMed
- J Conserv Dent. 2014 Jan;17(1):70-4 - PubMed
- Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2012 Mar;39(3):265-73 - PubMed
- Indian J Dent. 2015 Oct-Dec;6(4):172-80 - PubMed
- Eur J Dent. 2014 Jul;8(3):330-336 - PubMed
- J Appl Oral Sci. 2009 Sep-Oct;17(5):388-91 - PubMed
Publication Types