Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the infiltration potential of different self-etch adhesives into natural non-cavitated proximal lesions and the effect of dehydration protocol on the infiltration of a self-etch adhesive. Methods: 29 extracted molars and premolars with natural proximal lesions (ICDAS 1-2) were sectioned through the lesion providing two samples from each lesion. To compare the different adhesives, three groups of eight lesions were abraded with fine metallic strips and then etched with 37% H3P04 acid for 120 seconds. All teeth were stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate. After drying with compressed air and ethanol application, lesions were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal, Clearfïl SE Protect or OneCoat 7 Universal for 180 seconds and then coated with a thin layer of flowable composite (Tetric Flow). To compare the effect of dehydration protocol on infiltration, two groups of nine paired lesions were pretreated as described above. One group was dried using compressed air alone and the second group was dried using compressed air and ethanol, both groups were then infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal then coated with a thin film of flowable composite. After light curing, un-encapsulated dye was bleached by immersion in hydrogen peroxide. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Thin cuts of the teeth were observed with confocal microscopy and computer image analysis was performed (ImageJ). Results: ANOVA and Duncan post-hoc tests showed no significant differences of the infiltrated area between the three adhesives (P= 0.835), no significant difference was found between the group dried with air compared to the one dried with air and ethanol. It can be concluded that the tested adhesives may be used for infiltration of natural lesions following the described pretreatment. (Am J Dent 2018;31:243-248).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)243-248
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of dentistry
Volume31
Issue number5
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Adhesives
Compressed Air
Ethanol
Dehydration
Tooth
Air
Bicuspid
Immersion
Fluorescein
Confocal Microscopy
Hydrogen Peroxide
Analysis of Variance
Coloring Agents
Light
Acids
Scotchbond
flowable hybrid composite

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Abdelaziz, M., Adele, L. R., Bortolotto, T., Garcia-Godoy, F., Feilzer, A. J., & Krejci, I. (2018). Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions. American journal of dentistry, 31(5), 243-248.

Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions. / Abdelaziz, Marwa; Adele, Lodi Rizzini; Bortolotto, Tissiana; Garcia-Godoy, Franklin; Feilzer, Albert Joseph; Krejci, Ivo.

In: American journal of dentistry, Vol. 31, No. 5, 01.10.2018, p. 243-248.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abdelaziz, M, Adele, LR, Bortolotto, T, Garcia-Godoy, F, Feilzer, AJ & Krejci, I 2018, 'Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions', American journal of dentistry, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 243-248.
Abdelaziz M, Adele LR, Bortolotto T, Garcia-Godoy F, Feilzer AJ, Krejci I. Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions. American journal of dentistry. 2018 Oct 1;31(5):243-248.
Abdelaziz, Marwa ; Adele, Lodi Rizzini ; Bortolotto, Tissiana ; Garcia-Godoy, Franklin ; Feilzer, Albert Joseph ; Krejci, Ivo. / Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions. In: American journal of dentistry. 2018 ; Vol. 31, No. 5. pp. 243-248.
@article{319b4d0b6c054837a48a53378bba23fb,
title = "Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions",
abstract = "Purpose: To investigate the infiltration potential of different self-etch adhesives into natural non-cavitated proximal lesions and the effect of dehydration protocol on the infiltration of a self-etch adhesive. Methods: 29 extracted molars and premolars with natural proximal lesions (ICDAS 1-2) were sectioned through the lesion providing two samples from each lesion. To compare the different adhesives, three groups of eight lesions were abraded with fine metallic strips and then etched with 37{\%} H3P04 acid for 120 seconds. All teeth were stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate. After drying with compressed air and ethanol application, lesions were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal, Clearf{\"i}l SE Protect or OneCoat 7 Universal for 180 seconds and then coated with a thin layer of flowable composite (Tetric Flow). To compare the effect of dehydration protocol on infiltration, two groups of nine paired lesions were pretreated as described above. One group was dried using compressed air alone and the second group was dried using compressed air and ethanol, both groups were then infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal then coated with a thin film of flowable composite. After light curing, un-encapsulated dye was bleached by immersion in hydrogen peroxide. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Thin cuts of the teeth were observed with confocal microscopy and computer image analysis was performed (ImageJ). Results: ANOVA and Duncan post-hoc tests showed no significant differences of the infiltrated area between the three adhesives (P= 0.835), no significant difference was found between the group dried with air compared to the one dried with air and ethanol. It can be concluded that the tested adhesives may be used for infiltration of natural lesions following the described pretreatment. (Am J Dent 2018;31:243-248).",
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 = "243--248",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Non-invasive proximal adhesive restoration of natural non-cavitated proximal lesions

AU - Abdelaziz, Marwa

AU - Adele, Lodi Rizzini

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 investigate the infiltration potential of different self-etch adhesives into natural non-cavitated proximal lesions and the effect of dehydration protocol on the infiltration of a self-etch adhesive. Methods: 29 extracted molars and premolars with natural proximal lesions (ICDAS 1-2) were sectioned through the lesion providing two samples from each lesion. To compare the different adhesives, three groups of eight lesions were abraded with fine metallic strips and then etched with 37% H3P04 acid for 120 seconds. All teeth were stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate. After drying with compressed air and ethanol application, lesions were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal, Clearfïl SE Protect or OneCoat 7 Universal for 180 seconds and then coated with a thin layer of flowable composite (Tetric Flow). To compare the effect of dehydration protocol on infiltration, two groups of nine paired lesions were pretreated as described above. One group was dried using compressed air alone and the second group was dried using compressed air and ethanol, both groups were then infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal then coated with a thin film of flowable composite. After light curing, un-encapsulated dye was bleached by immersion in hydrogen peroxide. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Thin cuts of the teeth were observed with confocal microscopy and computer image analysis was performed (ImageJ). Results: ANOVA and Duncan post-hoc tests showed no significant differences of the infiltrated area between the three adhesives (P= 0.835), no significant difference was found between the group dried with air compared to the one dried with air and ethanol. It can be concluded that the tested adhesives may be used for infiltration of natural lesions following the described pretreatment. (Am J Dent 2018;31:243-248).

AB - Purpose: To investigate the infiltration potential of different self-etch adhesives into natural non-cavitated proximal lesions and the effect of dehydration protocol on the infiltration of a self-etch adhesive. Methods: 29 extracted molars and premolars with natural proximal lesions (ICDAS 1-2) were sectioned through the lesion providing two samples from each lesion. To compare the different adhesives, three groups of eight lesions were abraded with fine metallic strips and then etched with 37% H3P04 acid for 120 seconds. All teeth were stained with rhodamine isothiocyanate. After drying with compressed air and ethanol application, lesions were infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal, Clearfïl SE Protect or OneCoat 7 Universal for 180 seconds and then coated with a thin layer of flowable composite (Tetric Flow). To compare the effect of dehydration protocol on infiltration, two groups of nine paired lesions were pretreated as described above. One group was dried using compressed air alone and the second group was dried using compressed air and ethanol, both groups were then infiltrated with Scotchbond Universal then coated with a thin film of flowable composite. After light curing, un-encapsulated dye was bleached by immersion in hydrogen peroxide. Remaining lesion pores were stained with sodium fluorescein solution. Thin cuts of the teeth were observed with confocal microscopy and computer image analysis was performed (ImageJ). Results: ANOVA and Duncan post-hoc tests showed no significant differences of the infiltrated area between the three adhesives (P= 0.835), no significant difference was found between the group dried with air compared to the one dried with air and ethanol. It can be concluded that the tested adhesives may be used for infiltration of natural lesions following the described pretreatment. (Am J Dent 2018;31:243-248).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055071788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055071788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 243

EP - 248

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 5

ER -