Adhesion to Er : YAG laser-prepared dentin after long-term water storage and thermocycling

This in vitro study evaluated the microtensile bond strength of a resin composite to Er:YAG-prepared dentin after long-term storage and thermocycling. Eighty bovine incisors were selected and their roots removed. The crowns were ground to expose superficial dentin. The samples were randomly divided according to cavity preparation method (I-Er:YAG laser and II-carbide bur). Subsequently, an etch & rinse adhesive system was applied and the samples were restored with a resin composite. The samples were subdivided according to time of water storage (WS)/number of thermocycles (TC) performed: A) 24 hours WS/no TC; B) 7 days WS/500 TC; C) 1 month WS/2,000 TC; D) 6 months WS/12,000 TC. The teeth were sectioned in sticks with a cross-sectional area of 1.0-mm(2), which were loaded in tension in a universal testing machine. The data were subjected to two-way ANOVA, Scheffe and Fisher`s tests at a 5% level. In general, the bur-prepared group displayed higher microtensile bond strength values than the laser-treated group. Based on one-month water storage and 2,000 thermocycles, the performance of the tested adhesive system to Er:YAG-laser irradiated dentin was negatively affected (Group IC), while adhesion of the bur-prepared group decreased only within six months of water storage combined with 12,000 thermocycles (Group IID). It may be concluded that adhesion to the Er:YAG laser cavity preparation was more affected by the methods used for simulating degradation of the adhesive interface.

Bond strength of an adhesive system irradiated with Nd : YAG laser in dentin treated with Er : YAG laser

The purpose of this in vitro study was to verify through micro tensile bond test the bond strength of an adhesive system irradiated with Nd:YAG laser in dentine previously treated with Er:YAG laser. Twenty caries free extracted human third molars were used. The teeth were divided in four experimental groups (n = 5): (G1) control group; (G2) irradiation of the adhesive system with the Nd:YAG laser; (G3) dentin treatment with Er:YAG laser; (G4) dentin treatment with Er:YAG laser followed by the irradiation of the adhesive system with Nd:YAG laser. The Er:YAG laser fluency parameter for the dentin treatment was of 60 J/cm(2). ne adhesive system was irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser with fluency of 100 J/cm(2). Dental restorations were performed with Adper Single Bond 2/Z250. One tooth from each group was prepared for the evaluation of the adhesive interface under SEM and bond failure tests were also performed and evaluated. The statistical analysis showed statistical significant difference between the groups G1 and G3, G1 and G4, G2 and G3, and G2 and G4; and similarity between the groups G1 and G2, and G3 and G4. The adhesive failures were predominant in all the experimental groups. The SEM analysis showed an adhesive interface with features confirming the results of the mechanical tests. The Nd:YAG laser on the adhesive system did not influence the bond strength in dentin treated or not with the Er:YAG laser.

Influence of pulse repetition rate of Er : YAG laser and dentin depth on tensile bond strength of dentin-resin interface

The study evaluated the in vitro influence of pulse-repetition rate of Er:YAG laser and dentin depth on tensile bond strength of dentin-resin interface. Dentin surfaces of buccal or lingual surfaces from human third molars were submitted to tensile test in different depths (superficial, 1.0 and 1.5 mm) of the same dental area, using the same sample. Surface treatments were acid conditioning solely (control) and Er:YAG laser irradiation (80 mJ) followed by acid conditioning, with different pulse-repetition rates (1, 2, 3, or 4 Hz). Single bond/Z-250 system was used. The samples were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 h, and then the first test (superficial dentine) was performed. The bond failures were analyzed. Following, the specimens were identified, grounded until 1.0- and 1.5-mm depths, submitted again to the treatments and to the second and, after that, to third-bond tests on a similar procedure and failure analysis. ANOVA and Tukey test demonstrated a significant difference (p < 0.001) for treatment and treatment X depth interaction (p < 0.05). The tested depths did not show influence (p > 0.05) on the bond strength of dentin-resin interface. It may be concluded that Er:YAG laser with 1, 2, 3, or 4 Hz combined with acid conditioning did not increase the resin tensile bond strength to dentin, regardless of dentin depth. (C) 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Bond strength of adhesive restorations to Er : YAG laser-treated dentin

Background and Objective: evaluate the adhesion of adhesive restorations with and without a base of resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) to dentin irradiated with Er:YAG laser.Study Design/Materials and Methods: Twenty-four human molar teeth were divided into 6 groups (n=4): G1) 37% Phosphoric acid (PA) + Adhesive system (Ad) + Composite resin (CR); G2) RMGIC + CR; G3) Laser (60mJ-5Hz-20s) + PA + Ad + CR; G4) Laser (60 mJ-5 Hz-20 s) + RMGIC + CR; G5) Laser (100mJ-5Hz-20s) + PA + Ad + CR; G6) Laser (100mJ-5Hz-20s) + RMGIC + CR. Teeth were prepared, restored and cut into specimens, according to the treatment proposed and to methodology for microtensile test. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey statistical tests (alpha=5%).Results:. The mean values for adhesion (MPa) and standard deviation (+/- SD) were: G1) 26.30(+/- 4.50), G2) 5.34(+/- 2.87), G3) 21.16(+/- 6.01), G4) 5.22(+/- 1.52), G5) 22.23(+/- 4.98), G6) 5.25(+/- 3.08).Conclusion: the use of Er:YAG laser did not influence on the restorations adhesion.

Bond strength of an adhesive system irradiated with Nd : YAG laser in dentin treated with Er : YAG laser

The purpose of this in vitro study was to verify through micro tensile bond test the bond strength of an adhesive system irradiated with Nd:YAG laser in dentine previously treated with Er:YAG laser. Twenty caries free extracted human third molars were used. The teeth were divided in four experimental groups (n = 5): (G1) control group; (G2) irradiation of the adhesive system with the Nd:YAG laser; (G3) dentin treatment with Er:YAG laser; (G4) dentin treatment with Er:YAG laser followed by the irradiation of the adhesive system with Nd:YAG laser. The Er:YAG laser fluency parameter for the dentin treatment was of 60 J/cm(2). ne adhesive system was irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser with fluency of 100 J/cm(2). Dental restorations were performed with Adper Single Bond 2/Z250. One tooth from each group was prepared for the evaluation of the adhesive interface under SEM and bond failure tests were also performed and evaluated. The statistical analysis showed statistical significant difference between the groups G1 and G3, G1 and G4, G2 and G3, and G2 and G4; and similarity between the groups G1 and G2, and G3 and G4. The adhesive failures were predominant in all the experimental groups. The SEM analysis showed an adhesive interface with features confirming the results of the mechanical tests. The Nd:YAG laser on the adhesive system did not influence the bond strength in dentin treated or not with the Er:YAG laser.

Evaluation of the Morphological Characteristics of Laser-Irradiated Dentin

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different energy settings of Er:YAG laser irradiation on dentin surface morphology with respect to the number of opened dentinal tubules. BACKGROUND DATA An ideally prepared dentin surface with opened dentinal tubules is a prerequisite for adhesive fixation. No study, however, has yet compared the numbers of opened dentinal tubules with regard to statistical differences. METHODS Conventional preparations using a bur with or without additional acid etching acted as control groups. Dentin specimens were prepared from human third molars and randomly divided into eight groups according to the energy settings of the laser (1, 1.5, 4, 6, 7.5, and 8 W) and two controls (bur and bur plus acid etching). After surface preparation, dentin surfaces were analyzed with a scanning electron microscope, and the number of opened dentinal tubules in a defined area was counted. RESULTS The control groups showed smooth surfaces with (bur plus acid etching) and without opened dentinal tubules (bur), whereas all laser-irradiated surfaces showed rough surfaces. Using the energy setting of 4 W resulted in significantly more opened dentinal tubules than the conventional preparation technique using the bur with additional acid etching. In contrast, the energy setting of 8 W showed significantly fewer opened dentinal tubules, and also exhibited signs of thermal damage. CONCLUSIONS The Er:YAG laser with an energy setting of 4 W generates a dentin surface with opened dentinal tubules, a prerequisite for adhesive fixation.

Micromorphology of Resin-Dentin Interfaces Using One-Bottle Etch&Rinse and Self-Etching Adhesive Systems on Laser-Treated Dentin Surfaces: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope Analysis

Background and Objectives: This study evaluated the hybrid layer (HL) morphology created by three adhesive systems (AS) on dentin surfaces treated with Er:YAG laser using two irradiation parameters. Study Design: Occlusal flat dentin surfaces of 36 human third molars were assigned into nine groups (n = 4) according to the following ASs: one bottle etch&rinse Single Bond Plus (3M ESPE), two-step Clearfil Protect Bond (Kuraray), and all-in-one S3 Bond (Kuraray) self-etching, which were labeled with rhodamine B or fluorescein isothiocyanate dextran and were applied to dentin surfaces that were irradiated with Er:YAG laser at either 120 (38.7 J/cm(2)) or 200 mJ/pulse (64.5 J/cm(2)), or were applied to untreated dentin surfaces (control group). The ASs were light-activated following MI and the bonded surfaces were restored with resin composite Z250 (3M ESPE). After 24 hours of storage in vegetable oil, the restored teeth were vertically, serially sectioned into 1-mm thick slabs, which had the adhesive interfaces analyzed with confocal laser microscope (CLSM-LSM 510 Meta). CLSM images were recorded in the fluorescent mode from three different regions along each bonded interface. Results: Non-uniform HL was created on laser-irradiated dentin surfaces regardless of laser irradiation protocol for all AS, while regular and uniform HL was observed in the control groups. ""Stretch mark""-like red lines were found within the HL as a result of resin infiltration into dentin microfissures, which were predominantly observed in 200 mJ/pulse groups regardless of AS. Poor resin infiltration into peritubular dentin was observed in most regions of adhesive interfaces created by all ASs on laser-irradiated dentin, resulting in thin resin tags with neither funnel-shaped morphology nor lateral resin projections. Conclusion: Laser irradiation of dentin surfaces at 120 or 200 mJ/pulse resulted in morphological changes in HL and resin tags for all ASs evaluated in the study. Lasers Surg. Med. 42:662-670, 2010. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Micro-shear bond strength of Er : YAG-laser-treated dentin

This study tested if dentin adhesion is affected by Er:YAG laser. Ninety dentin disks were divided in groups (n=10): G1, control; G2, Er:YAG laser 150 mJ, 90 degrees contact, 38.8 J/cm(2); G3, Er:YAG laser 70 mJ, 90 degrees contact, 18.1 J/cm(2); G4, Er:YAG laser 150 mJ, 90 degrees non-contact, 1.44 J/cm(2); G5, Er:YAG laser 70 mJ, 90 degrees non-contact, 0.67 J/cm(2); G6, Er:YAG laser 150 mJ, 45 degrees contact, 37.5 J/cm(2); G7, Er:YAG laser 70 mJ, 45 degrees contact, 17.5 J/cm(2); G8, Er:YAG laser 150 mJ, 45 degrees non-contact, 1.55 J/cm(2); and G9, Er:YAG laser 70 mJ, 45 degrees non-contact, 0.72 J/cm(2). Bonding procedures were carried out and the micro-shear-bond strength (MSBS) test was performed. The adhesive surfaces were analyzed under SEM. Two-way ANOVA and multiple comparison tests revealed that MSBS was significantly influenced by the laser irradiation (p < 0.05). Mean values (MPa) of the MSBS test were: G1 (44.97 +/- 6.36), G2 (23.83 +/- 2.46), G3 (30.26 +/- 2.57), G4 (35.29 +/- 3.74), G5 (41.90 +/- 4.95), G6 (27.48 +/- 2.11), G7 (34.61 +/- 2.91), G8 (37.16 +/- 1.96), and G9 (41.74 +/- 1.60). It was concluded that the Er:YAG laser can constitute an alternative tool for dentin treatment before bonding procedures.

Adhesives bonded to erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser-irradiated dentin: transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy and tensile bond strength analyses

The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser irradiation on dentinal collagen by transmission electron microscopy and to analyze the resin-dentin interface by scanning electron microscopy. A tensile bond strength test was also applied. Specimens from 69 sound human third molars were randomly divided into three groups: control (no laser), and two irradiated groups, laser 250 (250 mJ/2 Hz) and laser 400 (400 mJ/4 Hz). Then, specimens were restored with two adhesive systems, an etch-and-rinse or a self-etch system. Although ultrastructural examination showed a modified surface in the irradiated dentin, there was no statistical difference in bond strength values between the laser groups and controls (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the use of Er:YAG laser for ablating human dentin did not alter the main adhesion parameters when compared with those obtained by conventional methods, thus reinforcing its use in restorative dentistry.

Microshear Bond Strength of Self-etching Bonding Systems to Ultrasound Diamond Bur-prepared Dentin

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of dentin abrasion on the microshear bond strength of two self-etching adhesive systems, using either an ultrasound diamond bur or a high-speed diamond bur.Materials and Methods: Twenty noncarious human third molars were sectioned mesiodistally into halves. The enamel was ground to expose a flat dentin surface on both sections. The dentinal surfaces were randomly assigned to two groups, depending on the method of smear layer preparation: ultrasound diamond bur (UB) or conventional diamond bur (CB). The prepared dentin surfaces received one of two self-etching systems: Clearfil SE Bond (CF) and One-Up Bond F (OB). A composite cylinder with a 0.95-mm diameter was bonded to each specimen and the microshear bond test was performed. The results were expressed in MPa and were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (alpha = 0.05).Results: There was no significant difference in dentin bond strength when comparing the conventional and ultrasonic abrasion methods. When the adhesive systems were compared, Clearfil SE Bond achieved higher bond strength means than did One-Up Bond F.Conclusion: The dentin surface preparation method did not influence the microshear bond strength and the Clearfil SE Bond adhesive system, independent of bur type used, Clearfil SE Bond showed higher bond strengths than did the One-Up Bond F adhesive system.

Micromorphology and adhesive performance of Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of primary teeth

This study evaluated (1) the micromorphology by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and (2) the adhesive performance by microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of diamond bur-treated dentin compared to Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of human primary teeth. (1) For qualitative SEM evaluation, dentin of 18 second primary molars (n = 3/method) was treated with either diamond bur as a control (group 1a: 40 μm diamond bur only (clinical situation); group 1b: grinding + 40 μm diamond bur) or with Er:YAG laser (group 2a (clinical situation, manufacturer's settings): 200 mJ/25 Hz (5 W) + 100 mJ/35 Hz (3.5 W) laser only; group 2b (experimental setting "high"): grinding + 400 mJ/20 Hz (8 W); group 2c (manufacturer's setting "finishing"): grinding + 100 mJ/35 Hz (3.5 W); group 2d (experimental setting "low"): grinding + 50 mJ/35 Hz (1.75 W)). (2) For evaluation of adhesive performance, 64 second primary molars were divided into four groups and treated as described for group 1b and groups 2b/c/d (n = 16/method), and μTBS of Clearfil SE/Clearfil Majesty Esthetic to dentin was measured. The SEM micrographs were qualitatively analyzed. The μTBS values were compared with a Kruskal-Wallis test. The significance level was set at α = 0.05. SEM micrographs showed the typical micromorphologies with a smear layer for the diamond bur groups and open dentin tubules for all laser-treated groups. However, in group 2d, the laser beam had insufficiently irradiated the dentin area, rendering the underlying ground surface partly visible. There were no statistically significant differences between μTBS values of the four groups (p = 0.394). This suggests that Er:YAG laser treatment of dentin of primary molars provides bond strengths similar to those obtained following diamond bur treatment.

Influence of water flow rate on shear bond strength of resin composite to Er : YAG cavity preparation

Purpose: To evaluate in vitro the influence of water flow rate on shear bond strength of a resin composite to enamel and dentin after Er:YAG cavity preparation. Methods: Ten bovine incisors were selected and roots removed. Crowns were sectioned in four pieces, resulting in 40 samples that were individually embedded in polyester resin (n=10), and ground to plane the enamel and expose the dentin. The bonding site was delimited and samples were randomly assigned according to cavity preparation: (1) Er:YAG/1.0 mL/minute; (2) Er:YAG/1.5 mL/minute; (3) Er:YAG/2.0 mL/minute and (4) High speed handpiece/bur (control group). Samples were fixed to a metallic device, where composite resin cylinders were prepared. Subsequently, they were stored for 24 hours and subjected to a shear bond strength test (500N at 0.5 mm/minute). Results: Means (MPa) were: enamel: 1: 12.8; 2: 16.8; 3: 17.5; 4: 36.0 and Dentin: 1: 13.6; 2: 18.7; 3: 12.1; 4: 21.3. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey`s test. Adhesion to enamel was more efficient than for dentin. The cavities prepared with conventional bur (control) presented higher statistically significant bond strength values (P<0.05) than for Er:YAG laser for both enamel and dentin. No significant differences were observed between water flow rates employed during enamel ablation. For dentin, the shear bond strength of 2.0 mL/minute water flow rate was lower than for 1.5 mL/minute and 1.0 mL/minute rates. The Er:YAG laser adversely affected shear bond strength of resin composite to both enamel and dentin, regardless of the water flow rate used.

Influence of Er,Cr : YSGG laser treatment on the microtensile bond strength of adhesives to dentin

Purpose: In light of the concept of minimally invasive dentistry, erbium lasers have been considered as an alternative technique to the use of diamond burs for cavity preparation. The purpose of this study was to assess the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to Er,Cr:YSGG laser-irradiated dentin using irradiation settings specific for cavity preparation. Materials and Methods: Fifty-four midcoronal dentin surfaces, obtained from sound human molars, were irradiated with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser or prepared with a diamond bur using a high-speed turbine. One etch-and-rinse (Optibond FL/Kerr) and three self-etching adhesives (Adper Prompt L-Pop/3M ESPE, Clearfil SE Bond/Kuraray, and Clearfil S-3 Bond/Kuraray) were used to bond the composite to dentin. The microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) was determined after 24 h of storage in water at 37 degrees C. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine pairwise statistical differences (p < 0.05). Prepared dentin surfaces, adhesive interfaces, and failure patterns were analyzed using a stereo microscope and Field-emission gun Scanning Electron Microscopy (Feg-SEM). Results: Significantly lower mu TBS was observed to laser-irradiated than to bur-cut dentin (p < 0.05), irrespective of the adhesive employed. Feg-SEM photomicrographs of lased dentin revealed an imbricate patterned substrate and the presence of microcracks at the dentin surface. Conclusion: Morphological alterations produced by Er,Cr:YSGG laser-irradiation adversely influence the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to dentin. Keywords: dentin, adhesion, adhesives, laser, ErCr:YSGG.

Influence of the Additional Er:YAG Laser Conditioning Step on the Microleakage of Class V Restorations

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of an additional Er:YAG laser conditioning step after laser cavity preparations, on the microleakage of class V composite restorations. Forty-eight bovine incisors were randomly divided into four groups: G1(control) cavities prepared with bur, G2- cavities prepared with laser (400 mJ/2 Hz), G3-cavities prepared and subsequently conditioned with Er:YAG laser (60 mJ/2 Hz); G4-idem for G3, but the laser conditioning was carried out without water-spray. All the cavities were restored using Clearfill SE Bond (R) and Z-250 (R) composite resin. The samples were thermal cycled for 700 cycles and then immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution. The sectioned restorations were exposed to a photoflood lamp to reveal silver nitrate penetration. The Kruskal-Walis one-way analyses of variance test and post hoc Wilcoxon pair-wise comparison were used to compare microleakage degrees. At the gingival margin G2 showed a lower microleakage mean than the control bur-prepared cavities (p = 0.0003). At occlusal margins there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p = 0.28). It may be concluded that Er:YAG laser class V cavity preparations do not need to be followed by an additional laser conditioning step to result in levels of microleakage similar to or lower than those obtained after bur preparations. (C) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 87B: 538-543, 2008

Influence of Cavity Preparation with Er:YAG Laser on Enamel Adjacent to Restorations Submitted to Cariogenic Challenge In Situ: A Polarized Light Microscopic Analysis

Background and Objectives: Er:YAG laser has been used for caries removal and cavity preparation, using ablative parameters. Its effect on the margins of restorations submitted to cariogenic challenge has not yet been sufficiently investigated. The aim of this study was to assess the enamel adjacent to restored Er:YAG laser-prepared cavities submitted to cariogenic challenge in situ, under polarized light microscopy. Study Design/Materials and Methods: Ninety-one enamel slabs were randomly assigned to seven groups (n = 13): I, II, III-Er:YAG laser with 250 mJ, 62.5 J/cm(2), combined with 2, 3, and 4 Hz, respectively; IV, V, VI-Er:YAG laser with 350 mJ, 87.5 J/cm(2), combined with 2, 3, and 4 Hz, respectively; VII-High-speed handpiece (control). Cavities were restored and the restorations were polished. The slabs were fixed to intra-oral appliances, worn by 13 volunteers for 14 days. Sucrose solution was applied to each slab six times per day. Samples were removed, cleaned, sectioned and ground to polarized light microscopic analysis. Demineralized area and inhibition zone width were quantitatively assessed. Presence or absence of cracks was also analyzed. Scores for demineralization and inhibition zone were determined. Results: No difference was found among the groups with regard to demineralized area, inhibition zone width, presence or absence of cracks, and demineralization score. Inhibition zone score showed difference among the groups. There was a correlation between the quantitative measures and the scores. Conclusion: Er:YAG laser was similar to high-speed handpiece, with regard to alterations in enamel adjacent to restorations submitted to cariogenic challenge in situ. The inhibition zone score might suggest less demineralization at the restoration margin of the irradiated substrates. Correlation between the quantitative measures and scores indicates that score was, in this case, a suitable complementary method for assessment of caries lesion around restorations, under polarized light microscopy. Lasers Surg. Med. 40:634-643, 2008. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.