Comparison of three adhesive systems in class II composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth: Influence of Er:YAG laser conditioning and gingival margin levels on microleakage

Abstract

BackgroundDental surface conditioning by Er:YAG laser is currently being investigated, as not all of the mechanisms and effects of this technique have been clearly studied. Thus, the aim of the present study was to assess the cervical microleakage of Class II resin composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth following either the respective conventional conditioning or additional Er:YAG laser conditioning, in association with varied adhesives.Material and MethodsStandardized mesial-occlusal-distal cavities (two gingival walls positioned in dentin and enamel, respectively) were created in 60 extracted human premolar teeth. Following the completion of the endodontic therapy, the teeth were grouped into six categories based on conditioning modality and adhesive strategy as follows: group 1-37% phosphoric acid/Adper Single Bond 2 (ASB2); group 2-Er:YAG laser/37% phosphoric acid/ASB2; group 3-Clearfil SE Bond (CSE); group 4-Er:YAG laser/CSE; group 5-Adper Easy One (AEO); and group 6-Er:YAG laser/AEO. Specimens were submitted to thermocycling and dye penetration, followed by longitudinal sectioning. The dye penetration was evaluated using a stereomicroscope. One specimen from each group was assessed under a scanning electron microscope for adhesive interface analysis.ResultsNo significant differences were found between the conditioning modalities, nor between the adhesive systems at both margins. Groups 1 and 2 showed a lower degree of microleakage in the enamel vs. dentin (p = 0.002). Group 2 showed a significantly lower incidence of microleakage in enamel vs. dentin (p = 0.005).ConclusionsCSE and AEO were comparable with that of ASB2 regarding sealing ability. Additional Er:YAG laser conditioning may be beneficial before ASB2 application in enamel. Key words:Endodontically treated teeth, etch-and-rinse adhesive, Er:YAG laser, gingival level, sealing ability, self-etch adhesive.

Microleakage and Marginal Integrity of Surface-Coated and Laser-Pretreated Class V Composite Restorations in Primary Teeth

“…[29][30][31][32][33] The lower bond strength can be attributed to the lack of resin penetration in laser-ablated dentin, showing the fusion of collagen fibrils, and the lack of interfibrillar space. 30 Consistent with our findings, Onay et al 34 found that neither the conditioning modality (Er:YAG laser) nor the adhesive systems affected the microleakage in class II composite restorations at enamel and dentin margins. Borsatto et al 35 assessed the effect of acid-etching and Er:YAG laser (120 mJ; 4 Hz) per se and in combination on the fissure sealant microleakage on primary teeth.…”

The Use of Laser Energy for Etching Enamel Surfaces in Dentistry—A Scoping Review

“…Most studies identified by the reviewers focused on Er:YAG lasers, a type of laser with application in cavity preparations in dental practice. Studies compared laser conditioning with conventional 37% phosphoric acid, revealing that the two methods can provide similar shear bond strengths [ 28 , 31 , 32 , 35 , 36 ]. There are certain studies revealing even a higher bond strength for laser etching [ 30 , 33 ].…”

Influence of the Chelating Solutions in the Resistance of Glass Fiber Posts to the Root Dentin

“…To obtain satisfactory adhesion of glass fiber posts to the root dentin is a primordial requirement, the smear layer removal, as well as the complete removal of all the remaining of endodontic sealer and gutta-percha on the walls of the canal. 1 For this purpose, several chelating solutions are used, especially before the intracanal medication and the root canal filling. 2 The most widely used chelating agent is 17% EDTA, which acts on the inorganic portion of the dentin, exposing the dentin tubules.…”

“…The restoration of endodontically treated teeth has been generated discussions over the years. 1 This procedure becomes extremely complex when teeth involved feature a large loss of tooth structure and reduction of resistance. 2 Before a endodontically treated tooth restoration a clinical and radiographic assessment is important for appropriate planning.…”

“…The sodium hypochlorite is a commonly used irrigating solution due to its antimicrobial and tissue solvent properties, so an additional solution is required for the inorganic layer of the smear layer removal. 1 2 3 4 For this purpose, a chelant solution is used such as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); MTAD (association between citric acid, doxycycline 3% of mg/5, and Tween 80); Tetraclean (association between citric acid, doxycycline 50 mL of mg/5, and propylene glycol), or Smear Clear (association between 17% EDTA, Cetavlon, and Cetramide). 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 The removal of this layer by these solutions is something significant because if this does not occur, this inorganic phase can serve as a physical barrier, interfering in the adhesion and penetration of sealing materials in the dentinal tubules.…”