Influence of 9.3 µm CO2 and Er:YAG laser preparations on marginal adaptation of adhesive mixed Class V composite restorations with one component universal adhesive.

PURPOSE: To examine the marginal adaptation in enamel and dentin of mixed Class V saucer shaped restorations where cavities were prepared by two different lasers. METHODS: A handpiece-integrated Er:YAG laser @ 4.5 W, 300 mJ, 15 Hz (LiteTouch III) and a novel CO2 laser @ 12.95 W, 19.3 mJ, 671 Hz (Solea 9.3 µm). Diamond bur preparation with a 25 µm diamond bur (Intensiv) in a red contra angle at high speed under water spray cooling served as the control. Eight cavities per group were readied and restored under simulation of dentin fluid with a one bottle universal adhesive (One Coat 7 Universal) and a nanohybrid resin composite (Everglow), applied in two layers. For every preparation technique, the adhesive system was applied in the selective-etch and the self-etch mode, resulting in six experimental groups. Marginal analysis was performed immediately after polishing and after simultaneous thermal (5-50°C, 2 minutes each) and mechanical (max. 49 N; 200,000 cycles) loading by using a SEM (x200 magnification). RESULTS: Significant differences were found for all groups - except groups 2 and 5 - between initial and terminal results and between the groups as well (P< 0.05, 2-way ANOVA with Fisher's post-hoc test). The bur prepared group with selective-etch technique showed the best overall results after loading, followed by Er:YAG prepared self-etch group and CO2-prepared selective-etch group. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: By using a universal one-component adhesive system, marginal adaptation in enamel and in dentin depended on the preparation method and on the adhesive's application technique as well. When using lasers, Er:YAG in self-etch mode and CO2 9.3 µm in selective-etch mode total marginal adaptation showed results which were comparable to conventional bur preparation with selective-etch technique.

Effect of light-curing time on microhardness of a restorative bulk-fill resin composite to lute CAD-CAM resin composite endocrowns.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the minimal irradiation time to reach a sufficient polymerization of a photopolymerizable restorative bulk-fill resin composite to lute endocrowns. METHODS: A photopolymerizable restorative bulk-fill resin composite (Filtek One Bulk Fill) was submitted to direct light-curing by a high power LED light-curing unit for 20 seconds as the positive control group (n = 10). Five more test groups (n= 10) were light-cured in a natural tooth mold from three sites (buccal, palatal and occlusal) under a 9.5 mm thick nanohybrid resin composite CAD-CAM endocrown (Lava Ultimate A2 LT), for different irradiation times: 90 seconds per site, 40 seconds per site, 30 seconds per site, 20 seconds per site and 10 seconds per site. Vickers microhardness measurements were made at two different depths and test/control ratios were calculated. Ratios of 0.8 were considered as an adequate level of curing. RESULTS: Analysis shows that 30 seconds x 3 was the minimal irradiation time that presented a test/control ratio above 0.8. Quantile regressions showed that the required irradiation time to reach a test/control ratio of 0.8 at a confidence level of 95% was 38 seconds and 37 seconds for 200 µm and 500 µm, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between microhardness of the two depths except for the irradiation time of 10 seconds. A 120-second (40 seconds per buccal, palatal and occlusal site) light-curing of photopolymerizable bulk-fill resin composite to lute a resin composite CAD-CAM endocrown restoration can be considered sufficient to reach adequate polymerization.