Degradation of the resin-dentin bonds after simulated and inhibited cariogenic challenge in an in situ model

The aim of this study was to evaluate the resindentin bonds of two simplified etch-and-rinse adhesive after simulated cariogenic and inhibited cariogenic challenge in situ. Dental cavities (4 mm wide, 4 mm long, and 1.5 mm deep) were prepared in 60 bovine teeth with enamel margins. Restorations were bonded with either adhesive Adper Single Bond 2 (3MESPE) or Optibond Solo Plus (Kerr). Forty restorations were included in an intra-oral palatal appliance that was used for 10 adult volunteers while the remaining 20 dental blocks were not submitted to any cariogenic challenge [NC group] and tested immediately. For the simulated cariogenic challenge [C+DA], each volunteer dropped 20% sucrose solution onto all blocks four times a day during 14 days and distilled water twice a day. In the inhibited cariogenic challenge group [C + FA], the same procedure was done, but slurry of fluoride dentifrice (1.100 ppm) was applied instead of water. The restored bovine blocks were sectioned to obtain a slice for cross-sectional Vickers microhardness evaluation and resindentin bonded sticks (0.8 mm2) for resindentin microtensile evaluation. Data were evaluated by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (a = 0.05). Statistically lower microhardness values and degradation of the resindentin bonds were only found in the C + DW group for both adhesives. The in situ model seems to be a suitable short-term methodology to investigate the degradation of the resindentin bonds under a more realistic condition. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 100B: 14661471, 2012.

Influence of ultrasound or halogen light on microleakage and hardness of enamel adjacent to glass ionomer cement

Background. The use of external sources of energy may accelerate the setting rate of glass ionomer cements (GICs) allowing better initial mechanical properties. Aim. To investigate the influence of ultrasound and halogen light on the microleakage and hardness of enamel adjacent to GIC restorations, after artificial caries challenge. Design. Cavities were prepared in 60 primary canines, restored with GIC, and randomly distributed into three groups: control group (CG), light group (LG) - irradiation with a halogen lightcuring unit for 60 s, and ultrasonic group (UG) application of ultrasonic scaler device for 15 s. All specimens were then submitted to a cariogenic challenge in a pH cycling model. Half of sample in each group were immersed in methylene blue for 4 h and sectioned for dye penetration analysis. The remaining specimens were submitted to Knoop cross-sectional microhardness assessments, and mineral changes were calculated for adjacent enamel. Results. Data were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test and two- way ANOVA with 5% significance. Higher dye penetration was observed for the UG (P < 0.01). No significant mineral changes were observed between groups (P = 0.844). Conclusion. The use of halogen light- curing unit does not seem to interfere with the properties of GICs, whereas the use of ultrasound can affect its marginal sealing.