Effects of different toothpastes on the prevention of erosion in composite resin and glass ionomer cement enamel and dentin restorations

Abstract

Effects of different toothpastes on the prevention of erosion in composite resin and glass ionomer cement enamel and dentin restorations Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different toothpastes on the surface wear of enamel, dentin, composite resin (CR), and resinmodified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and to perform a topographic analysis of the surfaces, based on representative images generated by atomic force microscopy (AFM) after erosion-abrasion cycles. Methodology: One hundred and forty bovine incisors were collected and divided into two groups: 72 enamel and 72 dentin blocks (4×4 mm). Half of the specimens were restored with CR (Filtek Z350 XT) and the other half with RMGIC (Fuji II LC). Then, samples were submitted to a demineralization cycle (5 days, 4×2 min/ day, 1% citric acid, pH 3.2) and exposed to three different toothpastes (2×15 s/day): without fluoride (WF, n=12), sodium fluoride-based (NaF, n=12), and stannous fluoride-based (SnF 2 , n=12). Surface wear, as well as restoration interfaces wear, were investigated by profilometry of the dental substrates and restorative materials. All representative surfaces underwent AFM analysis. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's tests (α=0.05). Results: NaF-based toothpaste caused the greater dentin surface wear (p<0.05). Toothpastes affected only enamel-restoration interfaces. AFM analysis showed precipitate formation in dentinal tubules caused by the use of fluoride toothpastes. Conclusions: NaF-based toothpastes had no protective effect on enamel adjacent to CR and RMGIC against erosionabrasion challenges, nor on dentin adjacent to RMGIC material. SnF2-based toothpastes caused more damage to interfaces between enamel and RMGIC.

Analysis of laboratory adhesion studies in eroded enamel and dentin: a scoping review

“…Regarding eroded dentin, there is a dissolution of peri and intertubular minerals, resulting in the exposure of a thick superficial organic layer and, after restoration, tag formation of under 3 μm whereas for sound dentin, these values tend to be between 9 and 15 μm [ 25 ]. Collapsed demineralized fibrils and excess water content are also observable, leading to a deficient hybrid layer and impairing the penetration and in situ polymerization of the adhesive, ultimately affecting bond strength [ 17 , 47 ]. Since eroded dentin leads to an increase of water present in the matrix, nanoleakage becomes a bigger threat to hybrid layers [ 42 ].Consequently, this water is partially responsible for accelerated activation of endogenous proteases, the so-called matrix metallo-proteinases (MMPs), capable of hydrolyzing the organic matrix [ 63 , 64 ].…”

“…Due to aforementioned factors, they behave differently during the adhesive process [ 21 , 22 ]. In enamel, the erosive process seems to be beneficial for adhesion since it promotes the creation of micro and macroporosities that facilitate resin penetration and retention, in a high surface energy substrate [ 13 , 17 , 21 ]. In contrast, there is increased difficulty in bonding to eroded dentin [ 21 , 23 , 24 ].…”

The Effects of Charcoal Toothpaste on Microhardness and Surface Roughness of Nanofilled, Micro hybrid Resin Composite and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer

“…Resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) is more prone to mechanical deterioration than resin composite, despite the fact that it creates a chemical contact with enamel and dentin and releases fluoride (5). Tooth brushing may have an impact on the material's surface qualities, according to several studies that examined various composite resins and RMGI for wear resistance, material loss during brushing routine, and surface roughness or degradation.…”

Advances in Preventive and Therapeutic Approaches for Dental Erosion: A Systematic Review

“…Current methods of preventing this issue are focused on adhesive protocols and novel biomimetic techniques that profit from nanotechnology advancements. They consist of fillers, new bioactive polymers, mouthwash, or toothpaste (TP) that promote calcium phosphate remineralization, such as ions of calcium, phosphate, and mostly fluoride [26,[33][34][35][36][37]. There are several remineralizing products on the market with different mechanisms of action, but the most effective treatment is not yet clear.…”