All groups showed some level of toxicity. Amongst the main solutions, chlorhexidine presented less cytotoxic potential. EDTA was the least cytotoxic of the auxiliary irrigant solutions, and the association of these two solutions showed the lowest toxicity potential amongst all groups.

The pastes varied in their ability to induce cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and oxidative stress. In general, Guedes-Pinto, Maxitrol and neomycin sulphate + bacitracin pastes exhibited better biocompatibility in vitro.

Occlusal sealants applied with self-etch systems show lower retention throughout time than sealants applied in the conventional approach, regardless of the use of adhesive systems.

BackgroundSilver diammine fluoride (SDF) applied before a restoration may prevent recurrent caries; therefore, its effect on the bonding of restorative materials is contradictory.AimTo assess through a systematic review and meta‐analysis the influence of SDF on the bonding performance of adhesive materials to dentine.DesignA systematic search was carried out in PubMed, Web of Science, LILACS, and Scopus. Studies comparing bond strength of adhesive systems or glass ionomer cement to SDF‐treated and ‐untreated (control) dentine were included. Global analysis comparing the bond strength data was performed, separately for adhesive systems and glass ionomer cement, using RevMan5.1, with a random‐effect model, at a 5% significance level.ResultsEleven studies were included in the review and ten in the meta‐analyses. Overall pooled effect for glass ionomer cement has shown no significant difference between the groups (Z = 0.47; P = .64). SDF treatment significantly impairs the bonding of adhesive systems to dentine (Z = 2.11; P = .03); this effect can be eliminated by the rinsing step (Z = 0.85; P = .40).ConclusionsThe previous application of SDF does not influence the dentine bond strength of glass ionomer cement, but compromises the bonding of adhesive systems.

No abstract