Color Changes in Artificially Induced Incipient Caries after Photodynamic Therapy with Different Concentrations of Methylene Blue and Toluidine Blue and Irrigation with Water and Hypochlorite.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the color changes in artificially induced incipient caries after photodynamic therapy (PDT) using different concentrations of methylene blue and toluidine blue, along with irrigation using water and hypochlorite. Materials and Methods: Forty-two sound human premolar teeth were used to create two artificial incipient carious lesions. One lesion was placed on the buccal surface and the other on the lingual surface. The color of these artificial incipient carious surfaces was determined using the CIE L ∗ a ∗ b ∗ color system. The teeth were then randomly assigned to 12 groups (n = 7) based on the PDT method. These methods included methylene blue with concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 µg/mL, followed by water irrigation, methylene blue with concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 µg/mL, followed by hypochlorite solution irrigation, toluidine blue with concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 µg/mL, followed by water irrigation, and toluidine blue with concentrations of 50, 100, and 150 µg/mL, followed by hypochlorite solution irrigation. The teeth underwent a colorimetry procedure again, and the resulting color changes were calculated. A three-way ANOVA was performed to analyze the effects of laser wavelength, concentration of the light-absorbing material, and irrigation solution on ΔE. Results: The results showed that the color changes caused by toluidine blue photosensitizer at a concentration of 100 µg/mL, with both water and hypochlorite irrigation, were not noticeable to the naked eye (ΔEwater = 3.04, ΔEhypochlorite = 2.00). However, in the other study groups, the color changes were perceptible (ΔE > 3.3). There were no significant differences in ΔE between different concentrations of methylene blue and toluidine blue when using either water or hypochlorite irrigation (P > 0.05). A significant difference was observed between methylene blue and toluidine blue at a concentration of 100 µg/mL with water irrigation (P=0.006). Additionally, a significant difference was found between methylene blue and toluidine blue at a concentration of 100 µg/mL with hypochlorite irrigation (P=0.049). However, no significant differences were observed between methylene blue and toluidine blue at other concentrations with either water or hypochlorite irrigation (P > 0.05). Conclusion: In conclusion, tooth color in teeth with incipient caries did not change significantly after PDT using toluidine blue (the photosensitizer) at a concentration of 100 µg/mL with either water or 1% hypochlorite solution irrigation for 5 s.

Evaluation of the cumulative effect of photodynamic therapy and local fluoride on the microhardness and topography of demineralized enamel and cementum surfaces.

Background: The present study aimed to determine the cumulative effect of two photodynamic therapy methods with methylene blue and indocyanine green and two topical fluoride therapy methods with fluoride varnish and silver diamine fluoride alone and in combination on the microhardness and topography of demineralized enamel and cementum surfaces. Materials and methods: Seventy-two sound human teeth were selected, and their buccal and lingual surfaces were assigned to two main groups of enamel and cementum using simple randomization. The initial surface hardness (SH) of the enamel and cementum in each sample was determined using a micro-Vickers hardness tester using a 200-g force in 10 s. Then artificial caries was induced by immersion in a demineralizing/remineralizing solution (i.e., each tooth provided two samples, one on the buccal aspect and the other on the lingual aspect). Each enamel/cementum main group was divided into two subgroups using simple randomization based on the local fluoride type (fluoride varnish and silver diamine fluoride) and the type of the photosensitizer agent (methylene blue and indocyanine green). Finally, 16 groups were achieved (n = 9). The final surface hardness of the enamel and cementum samples was determined as described above. Finally, the sample surfaces were prepared for the surface topography evaluation under a scanning electron microscope. The baseline microhardness was compared between the 16 study groups in the first step using one-way ANOVA. Then, three-way ANOVA was used to evaluate the effect of fluoride, laser, and surface (enamel and cementum) on microhardness. Results: All the groups exhibited decreased microhardness due to the induction of artificial caries. In both main groups of enamel and cementum, the lowest decrease in microhardness was recorded with combined photodynamic therapy and methylene blue photosensitizer material and fluoride varnish (15.1 % for cementum and 16.7 % for enamel), and the highest decrease in microhardness was recorded in the methylene blue group (35.7 % for cementum and 34.9 % for enamel). Conclusion: The combination of photodynamic therapy with the photosensitizer substance methylene blue or indocyanine green together with fluoride varnish or silver diamine fluoride is effective on the remineralization of demineralized enamel and cementum. Although there is no difference between the combination of photodynamic therapy with fluoride varnish compared to fluoride varnish alone, both of these treatments are more effective than using photodynamic therapy alone.