Effect of Antioxidant Agents After Dental Bleaching on Color Stability and Mechanical Properties of Bonding Interface Components in Ceramic Laminate Veneer Luting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Few studies have evaluated the influence of antioxidant agents on the optical and mechanical properties of ceramic laminate veneers after dental bleaching. Thus, this in vitro study aimed to evaluate the influence of antioxidant agents on the color stability and mechanical properties, such as nanohardness (HIT), elastic modulus (Eit*), and degree of conversion (DC) of the bonding interface components after dental bleaching in ceramic laminate veneer luting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 143 bovine teeth were distributed into experimental groups, according to the procedure method (unbleached or bleached with Whiteness HP Maxx 35%), antioxidant type (control, 10% ascorbic acid, or 10% α-tocopherol), and luting period (24 hours or 14 days) (n=13). The Tetric N-Bond Universal adhesive system and Variolink Esthetic LC resin cement were used as luting agents to lute IPS e.max ceramic restorations (0.6 mm in thickness) to enamel. A UV-visible spectrophotometer was used to assess color stability before and after UV-B artificial accelerated aging for 252, 504, and 756 hours (n=8). The HIT and Eit* of the adhesive and resin cement were measured using a nanohardness tester under a load of 1000 μN, and the DC was measured using a micro-Raman spectrometer (n=5). The color stability and mechanical properties were measured and evaluated by twoway and one-way ANOVA, respectively, and Tukey test (α=0.05). RESULTS: Distinct aging periods exerted significant changes on the color stability of the restorations luted in enamel associated with ascorbic acid, bleached and unbleached, and the bleached enamel under no antioxidant agent action, for the experimental groups evaluated after 14 days (p<0.05). The use of the α-tocopherol antioxidant solution after the bleaching process for 24 hours did not alter the optical and mechanical properties of the adhesive interface of the laminate restorations compared to those of the control group (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: The use of a 10% α-tocopherol antioxidant solution produced promising results, suggesting that it could be mediately used after tooth bleaching to lute ceramic laminate veneers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".