Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) compared to resin infiltration for treating initial proximal carious lesions

Marwa Abdelaziz, Adele Lodi-Rizzini, Tissiana Bortolotto, Franklin Garcia-Godoy, Albert Joseph Feilzer, Ivo Krejci

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To compare a new technique of non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) to the infiltration concept technique (ICON). Methods: Extracted human posterior teeth with non-cavitated proximal carious lesions (ICDAS code 1-2) were cut vertically to obtain two symmetrical lesions. Group 1 (NIPAR): Half of the paired lesions surfaces (n=13) were abraded with metallic strips and etched with 37% H3P04 for 120 seconds. Group 2 (ICON): The other half of the paired lesions' surfaces (n=13) were etched with 15% HCl gel for 120 seconds. All samples were then stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate (RITC). After ethanol drying and isolation of the cut surface, Group 1 samples were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal for 180 seconds and coated with a thin film of Tetric flow. Group 2 samples were infiltrated with ICON infiltrant following manufacturer's instructions. After light curing, unbound rhodamine was bleached by immersion in 30% hydrogen peroxide for 12 hours. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Samples were observed with confocal microscopy (CLSM) and the percentage of infiltration (area of resin infiltration/area of total demineralization xlOO) was calculated using ImageJ. Results: 11 samples out of 13 showed larger infiltrated area of the lesions in Group 1 (NIPAR) compared to Group 2 (ICON). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P< 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, NIPAR allowed for better infiltration of non-cavitated proximal carious lesions when compared to ICON. (Am J Dent 2018;31:255-260).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)255-260
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of dentistry
Volume31
Issue number5
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Adhesives
Rhodamines
Immersion
Fluorescein
Confocal Microscopy
Hydrogen Peroxide
Tooth
Ethanol
Gels
Light

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) compared to resin infiltration for treating initial proximal carious lesions. / Abdelaziz, Marwa; Lodi-Rizzini, Adele; Bortolotto, Tissiana; Garcia-Godoy, Franklin; Feilzer, Albert Joseph; Krejci, Ivo.

In: American journal of dentistry, Vol. 31, No. 5, 01.10.2018, p. 255-260.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abdelaziz, Marwa ; Lodi-Rizzini, Adele ; Bortolotto, Tissiana ; Garcia-Godoy, Franklin ; Feilzer, Albert Joseph ; Krejci, Ivo. / Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) compared to resin infiltration for treating initial proximal carious lesions. In: American journal of dentistry. 2018 ; Vol. 31, No. 5. pp. 255-260.
@article{85a9491563534ec1ab2e4158b846acb6,
title = "Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) compared to resin infiltration for treating initial proximal carious lesions",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare a new technique of non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) to the infiltration concept technique (ICON). Methods: Extracted human posterior teeth with non-cavitated proximal carious lesions (ICDAS code 1-2) were cut vertically to obtain two symmetrical lesions. Group 1 (NIPAR): Half of the paired lesions surfaces (n=13) were abraded with metallic strips and etched with 37{\%} H3P04 for 120 seconds. Group 2 (ICON): The other half of the paired lesions' surfaces (n=13) were etched with 15{\%} HCl gel for 120 seconds. All samples were then stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate (RITC). After ethanol drying and isolation of the cut surface, Group 1 samples were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal for 180 seconds and coated with a thin film of Tetric flow. Group 2 samples were infiltrated with ICON infiltrant following manufacturer's instructions. After light curing, unbound rhodamine was bleached by immersion in 30{\%} hydrogen peroxide for 12 hours. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Samples were observed with confocal microscopy (CLSM) and the percentage of infiltration (area of resin infiltration/area of total demineralization xlOO) was calculated using ImageJ. Results: 11 samples out of 13 showed larger infiltrated area of the lesions in Group 1 (NIPAR) compared to Group 2 (ICON). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P< 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, NIPAR allowed for better infiltration of non-cavitated proximal carious lesions when compared to ICON. (Am J Dent 2018;31:255-260).",
author = "Marwa Abdelaziz and Adele Lodi-Rizzini and Tissiana Bortolotto and Franklin Garcia-Godoy and Feilzer, {Albert Joseph} and Ivo Krejci",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "255--260",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) compared to resin infiltration for treating initial proximal carious lesions

AU - Abdelaziz, Marwa

AU - Lodi-Rizzini, Adele

AU - Bortolotto, Tissiana

AU - Garcia-Godoy, Franklin

AU - Feilzer, Albert Joseph

AU - Krejci, Ivo

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare a new technique of non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) to the infiltration concept technique (ICON). Methods: Extracted human posterior teeth with non-cavitated proximal carious lesions (ICDAS code 1-2) were cut vertically to obtain two symmetrical lesions. Group 1 (NIPAR): Half of the paired lesions surfaces (n=13) were abraded with metallic strips and etched with 37% H3P04 for 120 seconds. Group 2 (ICON): The other half of the paired lesions' surfaces (n=13) were etched with 15% HCl gel for 120 seconds. All samples were then stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate (RITC). After ethanol drying and isolation of the cut surface, Group 1 samples were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal for 180 seconds and coated with a thin film of Tetric flow. Group 2 samples were infiltrated with ICON infiltrant following manufacturer's instructions. After light curing, unbound rhodamine was bleached by immersion in 30% hydrogen peroxide for 12 hours. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Samples were observed with confocal microscopy (CLSM) and the percentage of infiltration (area of resin infiltration/area of total demineralization xlOO) was calculated using ImageJ. Results: 11 samples out of 13 showed larger infiltrated area of the lesions in Group 1 (NIPAR) compared to Group 2 (ICON). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P< 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, NIPAR allowed for better infiltration of non-cavitated proximal carious lesions when compared to ICON. (Am J Dent 2018;31:255-260).

AB - Purpose: To compare a new technique of non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration (NIPAR) to the infiltration concept technique (ICON). Methods: Extracted human posterior teeth with non-cavitated proximal carious lesions (ICDAS code 1-2) were cut vertically to obtain two symmetrical lesions. Group 1 (NIPAR): Half of the paired lesions surfaces (n=13) were abraded with metallic strips and etched with 37% H3P04 for 120 seconds. Group 2 (ICON): The other half of the paired lesions' surfaces (n=13) were etched with 15% HCl gel for 120 seconds. All samples were then stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate (RITC). After ethanol drying and isolation of the cut surface, Group 1 samples were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal for 180 seconds and coated with a thin film of Tetric flow. Group 2 samples were infiltrated with ICON infiltrant following manufacturer's instructions. After light curing, unbound rhodamine was bleached by immersion in 30% hydrogen peroxide for 12 hours. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Samples were observed with confocal microscopy (CLSM) and the percentage of infiltration (area of resin infiltration/area of total demineralization xlOO) was calculated using ImageJ. Results: 11 samples out of 13 showed larger infiltrated area of the lesions in Group 1 (NIPAR) compared to Group 2 (ICON). Statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P< 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, NIPAR allowed for better infiltration of non-cavitated proximal carious lesions when compared to ICON. (Am J Dent 2018;31:255-260).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055071878&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055071878&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 255

EP - 260

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 5

ER -