ABSTRACT
This in situ study evaluated the effect of Er:YAG laser irradiation in controlling the progression of enamel erosion-like lesions. Fifty-six enamel slabs (330 KHN ± 10 %) with one fourth of the surface covered with resin composite (control area) were submitted to initial erosion-like lesion formation with citric acid. The slabs were divided into two groups: irradiated with Er:YAG laser and non-irradiated. Fourteen volunteers used an intraoral palatal appliance containing two slabs, in two phases of 5 days each. During the intraoral phase, in a crossed-over design, half of the volunteers immersed the appliance in citric acid while the other half used deionized water, both for 5 min, three times per day. Enamel wear was determined by an optical 3D profilometer. ANOVA revealed that when deionized water was used as immersion solution during the intraoral phase, lower values of wear were showed when compared with the groups that were eroded with citric acid, whether irradiated or non-irradiated with Er:YAG laser. When erosion with citric acid was performed, Er:YAG laser was not able to reduce enamel wear. Small changes on enamel surface were observed when it was irradiated with Er:YAG laser. It may be concluded that Er:YAG laser irradiation did not reduce the progression of erosive lesions on enamel submitted to in situ erosion with citric acid.
Subject(s)
Lasers, Solid-State/therapeutic use , Tooth Erosion/prevention & control , Adult , Citric Acid , Composite Resins , Cross-Over Studies , Dental Enamel/pathology , Dental Enamel/radiation effects , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Laser Therapy , Male , Tooth Erosion/chemically inducedABSTRACT
This clinical study assessed the performance of posterior composite resins applied with the Adper™ Single Bond Plus (SB) and Adper™ Scotchbond SE (SE) adhesive systems and Filtek™ Supreme Plus composite resin, using modified US Public Health Service criteria. A total of 97 restorations were placed in posterior teeth by two calibrated operators. Application of the materials followed manufacturers' instructions. The restorations were evaluated by two examiners at baseline and after one year. Statistical analyses were conducted using the proportion test at a significance level of 5% (p<0.05). All the restorations evaluated (ie, 100%) received an alpha rating for the criteria of marginal discoloration and marginal integrity at baseline. At one year, for marginal discoloration, 64.6% of SB and 61.2% of SE received an alpha rating. For marginal integrity, 72.9% of SB and 77.6% of SE received an alpha rating. The other restorations received bravo ratings for both criteria. None of the teeth that received the restorative systems presented caries lesions around the restorations. A total of eight teeth presented postoperative sensitivity one week after baseline, five with SB and three with SE; the symptom had disappeared one year later. One year later, composite resin restorations using either adhesive system showed satisfactory clinical performance.
