The response of the dentin–pulp complex in rat teeth was investigated after direct capping with biodentine with or without bone marrow‐derived stem cells (BMDSCs). Following mechanical exposure, pulps were randomly capped with one of the followings materials: calcium hydroxide, biodentine or 1 × 105 BMDSCs mL−1 + biodentine. Histological examination was performed by light microscopy after 1, 3 and 5 weeks. Inflammatory reaction, necrotic tissue formation and calcific bridge formation were scored. Analysis showed that compared with the effects of calcium hydroxide or biodentine, BMDSCs + biodentine substantially reduced inflammatory reaction and necrotic tissue while promoting calcified tissue formation. Therefore, the combination of biodentine and BMDSCs could potentially stimulate pulp tissue regeneration after direct pulp capping.

This systematic review was aimed to evaluate occurrence of secondary caries and marginal adaptation in ion-releasing materials versus resin composite. Electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Open Grey databases with no date or language restrictions until May 21st, 2021, was conducted. Randomized clinical trials that compared ion-releasing restorations versus resin composite were included. For quantitative analysis, a random-effects meta-analysis with risk difference as an effect measure and a 95% confidence interval was used. Quality of evidence was assessed using The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochran Collaboration Risk of Bias tool. The inclusion criteria were met by 22 studies, and 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Three follow-up periods (1 year, 18 months–2 years, and 3 years) were evaluated. The overall quality of evidence for secondary caries and marginal adaptation outcomes was low. The results of the meta-analysis showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in both outcomes between ion-releasing materials and resin composite. The occurrence of secondary caries was not dependent on the nature of the restorative material. It is more likely a complex process that involves the same risk factors as primary carious lesions.

Aim: To evaluate the microleakage of three different restorative composite resins through gingival margins of proximal boxes by dye and bacterial penetration techniques. Materials and Methods: Class II slot cavities were prepared for sixty sound human premolar teeth. The teeth were divided into 3 main equal groups of 20 teeth each. Group I cavities were restored with Filtek Z250XT and considered as control ones while those of group II and III were restored with Sonic-filled Filtek Z250XT and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, respectively. At first, all teeth were undergone thermal cycling and then each group was subdivided into 2 subgroups of 10 teeth each; according to the microleakage technique used. Results: Monte-Carlo Statistical test showed that the three tested groups had no significant differences among them for the two techniques Conclusions: Sonic-fill technique had the least marginal leakage over the other techniques confirmed by both dye and bacterial leakage testing.

Objectives To compare flowable fiber‐reinforced and flowable bulk‐fill resin composites regarding their degree of conversion (DC) and microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to dentin in high C‐factor class I cavities. Materials and Methods One flowable fiber‐reinforced (EverX Flow, GC) and two flowable bulk‐fill composites (SDR, Dentsply, and Tetric N‐flow Bulk fill, Ivoclar Vivadent) were tested. Regarding DC, 10 cylindrical‐shaped specimens were prepared from each material (N = 30), measured using Fourier‐Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Regarding µTBS, class I cavities (4.5 × 4.5 × 3) were prepared on flat dentin surfaces of 30 molars, divided into three equal groups, restored with the three restorative materials, thermocycled, sectioned to create 1 mm × 1 mm cross‐sectional beams, then tested using a universal testing machine. Failure mode was assessed using a stereomicroscope. Two‐way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post‐hoc tests were used in DC, while One‐way ANOVA was used for µTBS. Results The used materials showed statistically significant differences in DC with the fiber‐reinforced composite having the highest value. No statistically significant differences were found between the materials regarding their µTBS. Conclusions Flowable fiber‐reinforced composite provided the most DC performance compared to the flowable bulk‐fill composites. The three used restorative materials provided comparable bonding ability to dentin in high C‐factor cavities. Clinical Significance Flowable fiber‐reinforced resin composite is preferred as a dentin‐replacement material in high‐stress bearing areas. However, both flowable fiber‐reinforced and bulk‐fill resin composites are equally effective in bonding to dentin in high C‐factor cavities.

No abstract