English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Prosthetic dentistry has shifted toward prevention of caries occurrence surrounding restorative margin through the anti-demineralization process. This study examines the ability of nanohydroxyapatite (NHA) gel and Clinpro (CP) on enhancing resistance to demineralization of enamel and cementum at margin of restoration.Materials and Methods   Thirty extracted mandibular third molars were segregated at 1 mm above and below cementoenamel junction (CEJ) to separate CEJ portions and substituted with zirconia disks by bonding to crown and root portions with resin adhesive. The enamel and cementum area of 4 × 4 mm 2  neighboring zirconia was applied with either NHA or CP, while one group was left no treatment (NT) before demineralized with carbopal. Vickers hardness (VHN) of enamel and cementum was evaluated before material application ( B  M ), after material application ( A  M ), and after demineralization ( A  D ). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc multiple comparisons were used to justify for the significant difference ( α  = 0.05). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) were determined for surface evaluations.Results   The mean ± SD of VHN for  B  M ,  A  M , and  A  D  for enamel and cementum was 393.24 ± 26.27, 392.89 ± 17.22, 155.00 ± 5.68 and 69.89 ± 4.59, 66.28 ± 3.61, 18.13 ± 0.54 for NT groups, respectively, 390.10 ± 17.69, 406.77 ± 12.86, 181.55 ± 7.99 and 56.01 ± 9.26, 62.71 ± 6.15, 19.09 ± 1.16 for NHA groups, respectively, and 387.90 ± 18.07, 405.91 ± 9.83, 188.95 ± 7.43 and 54.68 ± 7.30, 61.81 ± 4.30, 19.22 ± 1.25 for CP groups, respectively. ANOVA indicated a significant increase in anti-demineralization of enamel and cementum upon application of NHA or CP ( p  < 0.05). Multiple comparisons indicated the capability in inducing surface strengthening to resist demineralization for enamel and cementum of NHA which was comparable to CP ( p  > 0.05) as evidenced by SEM and XRD data indicating NHA and CP deposition and crystallinity accumulation.Conclusion   NHA and CP were capable of enhancing anti-demineralization for enamel and cementum. The capability in resisting the demineralization process of NHA was comparable with CP. NHA was highly recommended for anti-demineralization for enamel and cementum surrounding restorative margin.

the scientific world journal/thescientificworldjournal

Effectiveness of Nanohydroxyapatite on Demineralization of Enamel and Cementum Surrounding Margin of Yttria-Stabilized Zirconia Polycrystalline Ceramic Restoration