Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, Univ. of Campinas, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, University Center Uninovafapi, Teresina, Piaui, Brazil.
Am J Dent. 2023 Jun;36(3):136-142.
To determine caries inhibition potential of conventional and bulk-fill bioactive composites around restorations.
Enamel and dentin blocks were prepared using a diamond saw under water irrigation, finished (SiC, 600- and 800-grit) and polished (SiC 1,200, final polish= 0.2 μm). Blocks were then selected through enamel surface microhardness, and enamel and dentin standard cavities were restored (n=10/group) with conventional bioactive composite (Beautifil II, BTF), bulk-fill bioactive composite (Activa BioACTIVE, ACT), glass-ionomer cement (Ionofil Plus, ION), conventional composite (GrandioSO, GSO), and bulk-fill composite (Admira Fusion X-TRA, ADM). Afterwards, the blocks were subjected to pH cycling: 4 hours in demineralization and 20 hours in remineralization solutions for 7 days, before being cut in the middle. One half was used to calculate the carious lesion area (ΔS) using values obtained by cross-sectional microhardness (CSMH) testing. The other half was submitted to polarized light microscopy (PLM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The % of internal gap formation (GAP) of restorations' replicas were analyzed under SEM. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (α= 5%).
In terms of CSMH, ION group exhibited the lowest ΔS values, with no significant difference to ADM. The composites BTF and ACT were similar to each other (P< 0.05) and to their negative controls (GSO and ADM), respectively. ION showed lower caries formation under PLM, whereas the GSO group presented a greater demineralized area. ION presented the highest % of internal GAP formation. Bioactive composites (BTF and ACT) were similar to their corresponding conventional ones (GSO and ADM) in terms of GAP formation.
The glass-ionomer cement was more effective in inhibiting the formation of caries lesions around restorations. Because of the glass-ionomer cement's limited application in high load-bearing areas, the conventional bioactive composite would be a promising clinical choice.
确定传统型和大体积充填型生物活性复合材料在修复体周围的抑制龋齿潜力。
采用金刚石锯片在水喷淋下制备釉质和牙本质块，用 SiC（600 目和 800 目）进行表面打磨和 SiC 1（最终抛光为 0.2μm）进行抛光。然后通过釉质表面显微硬度选择块体，并使用传统生物活性复合材料（ Beautifil II，BTF）、大体积充填生物活性复合材料（ Activa BioACTIVE，ACT）、玻璃离子水门汀（ Ionofil Plus，ION）、传统复合材料（ GrandioSO，GSO）和大体积充填复合材料（Admira Fusion X-TRA，ADM）对釉质和牙本质标准腔进行充填（每组 n=10）。随后，将块体置于 pH 循环中：7 天内，4 小时脱矿质，20 小时矿化液再矿化，然后将其从中间切开。一半用于计算通过横截面试样显微硬度（CSMH）测试获得的病变面积（ΔS）。另一半用于偏振光显微镜（PLM）和扫描电子显微镜（SEM）观察。通过 SEM 分析修复体复制件内部间隙形成（GAP）的%。数据通过方差分析和 Tukey 检验（α=5%）进行分析。
在 CSMH 方面，ION 组的 ΔS 值最低，与 ADM 无显著差异。复合材料 BTF 和 ACT 彼此相似（P<0.05），分别与它们的阴性对照（GSO 和 ADM）相似。PLM 下 ION 形成龋齿的可能性较低，而 GSO 组出现了更大的脱矿区。ION 组的内部 GAP 形成率最高。生物活性复合材料（BTF 和 ACT）在 GAP 形成方面与相应的传统复合材料（GSO 和 ADM）相似。
玻璃离子水门汀在抑制修复体周围龋齿形成方面更有效。由于玻璃离子水门汀在高负荷区的应用有限，传统生物活性复合材料将是一种有前途的临床选择。
