Bond durability in erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser-irradiated enamel.

This study sought to evaluate the influence of thermocycling and water storage on the microtensile bond strength of composite resin bonded to erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG)-irradiated and bur-prepared enamel. Eighty bovine incisors were selected and sectioned. Specimens were ground to produce a flat enamel surface. Samples were randomly assigned according to cavity preparation device: (I) Er:YAG laser and (II) high-speed turbine, and were subsequently restored with composite resin. They were subdivided according to the duration of water storage (WS)/number of thermocycles (TCs): 24 h WS/no TCs; 7 days WS/500 TCs; 1 month WS/2,000 TCs; 6 months WS/12,000 TCs. The teeth were sectioned into 1.0 mm(2)-thick slabs and subjected to tensile stress in a universal testing machine. Data were submitted to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test at a 0.05 significance level. The different periods of water storage and thermocycling did not influence the microtensile bond strength (microTBS) values in the Er:YAG laser-prepared groups. In bur-prepared enamel, the group submitted to 12,000 TCs/6 months' WS (IID) showed a significant decrease in bond strength values when compared to the group stored in water for 24 h and not submitted to thermocycling (IIA), but values were statistically similar to those obtained in all Er:YAG laser groups and in the bur- prepared groups degraded with 500 TCs/1 week WS (IIB) or 2,000 TCs/1 month WS (IIC). It may be concluded that adhesion of an etch-and-rinse adhesive to Er:YAG laser-irradiated enamel was not affected by the methods used to simulate degradation of the adhesive interface and was similar to adhesion in the bur-prepared groups in all periods of water storage and thermocycling.

SEM analysis of enamel surface treated by Er:YAG laser: influence of irradiation distance.

BACKGROUND: Depending on the distance of laser tip to dental surface a specific morphological pattern should be expected. However, there have been limited reports that correlate the Er:YAG irradiation distance with dental morphology. PURPOSE: To assess the influence of Er:YAG laser irradiation distance on enamel morphology, by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM). METHODS: Sixty human third molars were employed to obtain discs (approximately =1 mm thick) that were randomly assigned to six groups (n=10). Five groups received Er:YAG laser irradiation (80 mJ/2 Hz) for 20 s, according to the irradiation distance: 11, 12, 14, 16, or 17 mm and the control group was treated with 37% phosphoric acid for 15 s. The laser-irradiated discs were bisected. One hemi-disc was separated for superficial analysis without subsequent acid etching, and the other one, received the phosphoric acid for 15 s. Samples were prepared for SEM. RESULTS: Laser irradiation at 11 and 12 mm provided an evident ablation of enamel, with evident fissures and some fused areas. At 14, 16 and 17 mm the superficial topography was flatter than in the other distances. The subsequent acid etching on the lased-surface partially removed the disorganized tissue. CONCLUSIONS: Er:YAG laser in defocused mode promoted slight morphological alterations and seems more suitable for enamel conditioning than focused irradiation. The application of phosphoric acid on lased-enamel surface, regardless of the irradiation distance, decreased the superficial irregularities.

Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer) and two polyacid-modified resin composites (F2000 and Freedom) over 1 year. Nineteen patients with at least three cervical lesions were selected, providing an initial sample size of 87 restorations (29 per material), being 78 to non-carious and nine to carious lesions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 months and 1 year after placement, using modified US Public Health Service criteria: colour match, marginal discoloration, caries, anatomical form, marginal integrity and surface texture. At baseline, restorations were considered as acceptable for all criteria. At 1-year recall, 21 restorations per material were re-examined. Freedom was rated Bravo or Charlie for all the examined criteria and Vitremer earned an Alfa rating solely for the criterion caries. On the contrary, F2000 showed the best overall results, although presenting significant alteration in colour match. Statistical analysis of data was performed using chi-square and Mc Nemar tests. As to the evaluated periods, significant difference was observed solely between baseline and 1-year recall. Freedom and Vitremer were statistically different (P < 0.01) as to anatomical form and surface texture. For F2000, significant difference (P < 0.05) was noticed as to colour match and anatomical form. After 1-year follow-up, F2000 showed the most acceptable results as to the analysed criteria.

Effect of three surface sealants on marginal sealing of Class V composite resin restorations.

This study evaluated in vitro the effectiveness of three different surface sealants (Fortify, Protect-it! and Optiguard) on the marginal sealing of Class V light-activated composite resin restorations (Prodigy). For this purpose, 20 sound noncarious human premolars extracted within a six-month period were selected. Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and cervical margin in cementum were prepared in both buccal and lingual surfaces. The teeth, randomly assigned in four groups with 10 cavities in each group, were restored with composite resin after applying an adhesive system (Optibond FL). After the finishing and polishing procedures, the restorations were covered with a specific surface sealant, except for the control samples, which were not sealed. After placing restorations, the specimens were thermocycled and immersed in a 50% silver nitrate solution (tracer agent) for eight hours, sectioned longitudinally and analyzed for leakage using an optical microscope in a blind study with three examiners. The marginal microleakage was evaluated at the occlusal and cervical interfaces and compared among the four groups using the Kruskall-Wallis and the Wilcoxon Tests. There was better sealing at the occlusal margin, and in this region, there were no statistically significant differences among the materials (p > 0.05). In the cervical region, Fortify and Protect-it! showed improved results over the Control Group, and Optiguard showed similar results to the Control Group (without sealing).