ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2018 | Volume
: 4
| Issue : 1 | Page : 6-9 |
|
Solubility and water sorption of novel atraumatic restorative treatment materials: A In vitro Study
P Divya Kumari1, S Khijmatgar1, A Chowdhury2, Martin Grootveld3, Edward Lynch4, Chitta R Chowdhury1
1 Department of Oral Biology and Genomic Studies, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte (Deemed to be University) Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India 2 Global Child Health, King's College London, London, UK 3 Professor of Bioanalytical Chemistry and Chemical Pathology, Health and Life Sciences, Leicester School of Pharmacy, Biomedical & Environmental Health, De Montfort University, The Gateway, Leicester, UK 4 School of Dental Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
Correspondence Address:
Prof. Chitta R Chowdhury Head of Department of Oral Biology and Genomic Studies, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka India
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/ijohr.ijohr_2_18
|
|
Objectives: The objective is to determine the solubility (SL) and sorption of novel atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) materials in deionized water or artificial saliva. Materials and Methods: Two compositions of newly developed ART materials were prepared. Individual compositions were prepared separately and placed in 100% humidity at ambient temperature for 24 h. Each was stored in separate vials, either 7 ml of deionized or artificial saliva at ambient temperature for 1, 7, 14, or 28 days. The sorption (S%) and SL% were then determined. Student's t-test was employed to assess the significance level of the differences observed. Results: After 1 day, the mean values for water sorption of the ART-I were 12.1% and ART-II were 16.8% in deionized water (P = 0.01). However, the mean water sorption in artificial saliva for ART-1 was 15.3% and that for ART-II was 18.5% (P = 0.05). The mean SL of ART-I and ART-II was 7.4% and 7.2%, respectively, in deionized water (P = 0.66), and in artificial saliva, it was 7.0% and 6.0%, respectively (P = 0.19). Conclusions: We conclude that water sorption potential of ART-II is more in artificial saliva and SL potential of ART-I was more in deionized water.
|
|
|
|
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
|
|