The Effect of Optical Profilometry on Dental Materials

Forfattere

  • Reem Abdulrahim Al-Esraa University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/d3000.2026.1392

Nøgleord:

Dental Stone, Translucency, Prosthodontics

Resumé

The goal of this study was to use a non-contact laser profilometer (NCLP) to evaluate the digitalization behavior of various dental materials. Glass slab was used to generate standardized surface features after three kinds of dental stone Type III, Type IV, and Type V high-strength dental stone and fifteen imprint ingredients were mixed according to the directions of the manufacturers. The surface roughness parameters Ra, Rq, and Rt were calculated using 20 randomly chosen transverse profiles after the NCLP analyzed a 6 × 40 mm scan region from every sample. After that, the impression materials were filled with dental stone called Silky-RockTM (Whip Mix Corp., Louisville, KY, USA), and the casts were measured for roughness in the same way. The statistical study of differences in roughness between materials was conducted using one-way ANOVA, while the comparison of impression materials to their matching stone casts was done using a paired t-test. There were statistical differences (p < 0.05) in each group (impression materials and dental stones) between the various tested materials. The dental stones had surface roughness values that varied from 0.84 to 1.08 µm, Rq values from 1.06 to 1.31 µm, and Rt values from 5.48 to 6.83 «m. From 0.73 to 4.62 µm, Rq from 0.93 to 6.19 µm, and Rt from 4.61 to 39.54 µm were the roughness values for the impression materials. Dark colored impression materials had a significantly different roughness value compared to lighter color ones (p < 0.05). The Silky-RockTM castings had roughness values ranging from 0.80 to 1.04 µm for Ra, 1.01 to 1.27 µm for Rq, and 5.01 to 6.34 µm for Rt. After replication in many impression materials, Silky-RockTM dental stone showed a statistically significant reduction in roughness change (p<0.01). Optical profilometry digitization accuracy was affected by material properties such as surface texture, translucency, and color of dental stones and impression materials.

Referencer

1. Gregg T, Mace S, West NX, Addy M. A study in vitro of the abrasive effect of the tongue on enamel and dentine softened by acid erosion. Caries Res. 2004;38:557-60.

2. Schrötzlmair F, Müller M, Pongratz T, Eder M, Johnson T, Vogeser M, von Holzschuher V, Zengel P, Sroka R. Laser lithotripsy of salivary stones: Correlation with physical and radiological parameters. Lasers in surgery and medicine. 2015 Apr;47(4):342-9.

3. Ganss C, Schlueter N, Friedrich D, Klimek J. Efficacy of waiting periods and topical fluoride treatment on toothbrush abrasion of eroded enamel in situ. Caries Res. 2007;41:146-51.

4. Attin T, Siegel S, Buchalla W, Lennon AM, Hannig C, Becker K. Brushing abrasion of softened and remineralised dentin: an in situ study. Caries Res. 2004;38:62-6.

5. Raif J, Vardi M, Nahlieli O, Gannot I. An Er: YAG laser endoscopic fiber delivery system for lithotripsy of salivary stones. Lasers in Surgery and Medicine: The Official Journal of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery. 2006 Jul;38(6):580-7.

6. De Cesero L, de Oliveira EM, Junior LH, Papaléo RM, Mota EG. The addition of silica nanoparticles on the mechanical properties of dental stone. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2017 Oct 1;118(4):535-9.

7. Kumar S, Keeling A, Osnes C, Bartlett D, O’Toole S. The sensitivity of digital intraoral scanners at measuring early erosive wear. Journal of dentistry. 2019 Feb 1;81:39-42.

8. Azzopardi A, Bartlett DW, Watson TF, Sherriff M. The measurement and prevention of erosion and abrasion. J Dent. 2001;29:395-400.

9. O'Toole S, Bartlett D, Keeling A, McBride J, Bernabe E, Crins L, Loomans B. Influence of scanner precision and analysis software in quantifying three-dimensional intraoral changes: two-factor factorial experimental design. Journal of medical Internet research. 2020 Nov 27;22(11):e17150.

10. Schlueter N, Ganss C, De Sanctis S, Klimek J. Evaluation of a profilometrical method for monitoring erosive tooth wear. Eur J Oral Sci. 2005;113:505-11.

11. Chadwick RG, Mitchell HL. Conduct of an algorithm in quantifying simulated palatal surface tooth erosion. J Oral Rehabil. 2001;28:450-6.

12. Eisenburger M, Shellis RP, Addy M. Comparative study of wear of enamel induced by alternating and simultaneous combinations of abrasion and erosion in vitro. Caries Res. 2003;37:450-5.

13. Wetton S, Hughes J, West N, Addy M. Exposure time of enamel and dentine to saliva for protection against erosion: a study in vitro. Caries Res. 2006;40:213-7.

14. Gholamrezaei K, Vafaee F, Afkari BF, Firouz F, Seif M. Fit of cobalt-chromium copings fabricated by the selective laser melting technology and casting method: A comparative evaluation using a profilometer. Dental Research Journal. 2020 May 1;17(3):200-7.

15. O’Toole S, Osnes C, Bartlett D, Keeling A. Investigation into the validity of Wear Compare, a purpose-built software to quantify erosive tooth wear progression. Dental Materials. 2019 Oct 1;35(10):1408-14.

16. Wieland M, Textor M, Spencer ND, Brunette DM. Wavelength-dependent roughness: a quantitative approach to characterizing the topography of rough titanium surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16:163-81.

17. DeLong R, Pintado MR, Ko CC, Hodges JS, Douglas WH. Factors influencing optical 3D scanning of vinyl polysiloxane impression materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;10:78-85.

18. Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Rousson V. Surface roughness and gloss of dental materials as a function of force and polishing time in vitro. Dent Mater. 2006;22:146-65.

19. Shah S, Sundaram G, Bartlett D, Sherriff M. The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimpositional software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques. J Dent. 2004;32:653-8.

Downloads

Publiceret

2026-06-16

Nummer

Årg. 14 Nr. 1 (2026)

Sektion

Adults & the Elderly

Licens

Copyright (c) 2026 Reem Abdulrahim

Creative Commons License

Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse (by).

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.