A comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional measurements of wear in a laboratory investigation

被引:30
|
作者
Rodriguez, Jose M. [1 ]
Bartlett, David W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Kings Coll London, Inst Dent, Restorat Grp, London SE1 9RT, England
关键词
Erosion; Abrasion; Two-dimensional; Three-dimensional; Surface matching; Profilometers; IN-VITRO; TOOTHBRUSH ABRASION; SURFACE-ROUGHNESS; ERODED ENAMEL; SITU;
D O I
10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.001
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives. The aim of this research was to compare two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) tooth measuring techniques after subjecting enamel samples to tooth wear in vitro on an erosionabrasion model. Method. 80 polished mid-coronal enamel sections were subjected to 10 wear cycles. Each cycle consisted of remineralization for 2h in artificial saliva, followed by 10min immersion in one of four acidic fruit drinks or distilled water and finally toothbrush abrasion with a non-fluoridated tooth paste. The resulting wear scars were measured using 2D and 3D techniques using surface matching software. Results. The 2D step heights measurements from the exposure to the four acidic drinks showed no statistically significant differences (median wear range=22.432.5 mu m) between them (p=0.99) but there were differences with distilled water (median wear=10.0 mu m) (p=0.01). The 3D measurements showed that two drinks produced more wear compared to the others and water when the whole surface and volume exposed to wear was accounted for (p=0.01). Significance. The difference in data from the two techniques showed that 3D measurements gave a more accurate assessment of the impact of the wear regime.
引用
收藏
页码:E221 / E225
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional radiographic measurements of polyethylene wear
    Sychterz, CJ
    Yang, AM
    McAuley, JP
    Engh, CA
    [J]. CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 1999, (365) : 117 - 123
  • [2] A Comparison Between the Accuracy of Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Strain Measurements
    Desai, Niranjan
    Poling, Joel
    Fischer, Gregor
    Georgakis, Christos
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION, DIAGNOSTICS AND PROGNOSTICS OF ENGINEERING SYSTEMS, 2018, 1 (02):
  • [3] Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements
    Budge, Matthew D.
    Lewis, Gregory S.
    Schaefer, Eric
    Coquia, Stephanie
    Flemming, Donald J.
    Armstrong, April D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2011, 20 (04) : 577 - 583
  • [4] A comparison between the two-dimensional and three-dimensional lattices
    Dolocan, A
    Dolocan, VO
    Dolocan, V
    [J]. MODERN PHYSICS LETTERS B, 2004, 18 (25): : 1301 - 1309
  • [5] A comparison of two-dimensional radiography and three-dimensional computed tomography in angular cephalometric measurements
    Nalcaci, R.
    Ozturk, F.
    Sokucu, O.
    [J]. DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2010, 39 (02) : 100 - 106
  • [6] Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional laparoscopic video systems
    McDougall, EM
    Soble, JJ
    Wolf, JS
    Nakada, SY
    Elashry, OM
    Clayman, RV
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1996, 10 (04) : 371 - 374
  • [7] A comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional analyses of facial motion
    Gross, MM
    Trotman, CA
    Moffatt, KS
    [J]. ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 1996, 66 (03) : 189 - 194
  • [8] Comparison Between Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Dynamic Stall
    Kaufmann, K.
    Gardner, A. D.
    Costes, M.
    [J]. NEW RESULTS IN NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL FLUID MECHANICS X, 2016, 132 : 315 - 325
  • [9] Three-Dimensional Versus Two-Dimensional Neuroendoscopy: A Preclinical Laboratory Study
    Raheja, Amol
    Kalra, Ricky
    Couldwell, William T.
    [J]. WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2016, 92 : 378 - 385
  • [10] Comparison between two-dimensional and midsagittal three-dimensional cephalometric measurements of dry human skulls
    Damstra, Janalt
    Fourie, Zacharias
    Ren, Yijin
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2011, 49 (05): : 392 - 395