{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03521594684385382, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009966777408637873, 'mean_word_length': 5.146938775510204, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Comparison Of Surface Roughness Values of Various Restorative Materials Immersed in Pedodontic Pre- and Probiotics

The present in vitro study aims to evaluate pre- and probiotic liquids' effect on surface roughness values of restorative materials after one month of immersion. 360 disc-shaped samples (5mm x 2mm) were prepared from two types of glass-ionomer cements (GIC), a resin-modified GIC, a compomer, three bulk-fill composites, and one microhybrid composite. After the surfaces were polished, samples were divided into three groups (n = 15) and immersed for 10 minutes daily for one month in either a probiotic sachet, kefir (prebiotic), or artificial saliva. After that, the surface roughness values were measured by a profilometer. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluations of one sample from tested materials were also added. Statistical data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni–Dunn tests. One of the GIC materials had significantly rougher surfaces in the probiotic sachet, followed by the compomer (p < 0.05). The compomer showed the roughest surfaces after immersion in kefir, followed by the microhybrid composite (Z250). Probiotic sachets formed rougher surfaces than kefir among samples. SEM images revealed the inorganic filler structures and microcracks on the surfaces. A high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement, Equia Fil Forte, and other composite-based materials tested in the present study can be used in pediatric patients who use pre- and probiotic supplements.