Coelho A S, Vilhena L, Amaro I, Melo A, Paula A, Marto C M, Ferreira M M, Ramalho A, Carrilho E
Institute of Integrated Clinical Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Institute for Clinical and Biomedical Research (iCBR), Area of Environment, Genetics and Oncobiology (CIMAGO), Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2025 Feb;26(1):95-108. doi: 10.1007/s40368-024-00949-9. Epub 2024 Nov 1.
To evaluate and compare the effect of two enzymatic chemo-mechanical caries removal agents with conventional caries removal using rotatory instruments on the adhesion of composite resin to dentin of permanent teeth.
The sample comprised 30 permanent molars with caries lesions extending to the dentin, randomly distributed into three groups (n = 10 each): 1-Caries removal with rotary instruments (control group); 2-Caries removal with Papacárie Duo (F&A Laboratório Farmacêutico, São Paulo, Brazil); 3-Caries removal with Brix 3000™ (Brix S.R.L., Carcarañá, Argentina). After caries removal, the specimens were rinsed and dried. Scotchbond Universal™ adhesive (3 M, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA) was actively applied in self-etch mode and light-cured. Resin composite increments were applied using a silicone mold (3 × 3 × 2 mm) and light-cured. Shear bond strength (MPa), work-to-debonding (J/m), and shear modulus (kPa) were evaluated. For statistical analysis, the level of significance was set at 5%.
The control group presented significantly higher shear bond strength values (8.50 ± 2.69 MPa) compared to the Brix 3000™ group (5.72 ± 1.55 MPa, p = 0.008). There were no significant differences between Papacárie Duo (6.66 ± 0.86 MPa) and the other groups (p > 0.05). Regarding work-to-debonding, the Papacárie Duo group had a significantly higher result (2944.41 ± 450.21 J/m) than the Brix 3000™ group (1189.41 ± 504.13 J/m, p < 0.001) and the control group (967.10 ± 270.01 J/m, p < 0.001). Concerning shear modulus, the control group showed a significantly higher result (558.67 ± 168.96 kPa) than the Brix 3000™ group (339.79 ± 143.78 kPa, p = 0.008) and the Papacárie Duo group (223.04 ± 127.30 kPa, p < 0.001).
While the application of Papacárie Duo did not negatively affect composite resin adhesion to dentin of permanent teeth, the application of Brix 3000™ reduced adhesive forces, potentially limiting its clinical use. Further investigations are warranted to elucidate the effects of these materials on dentin substrate, particularly through clinical studies.
评估并比较两种酶促化学机械去龋剂与使用旋转器械进行传统去龋对复合树脂与恒牙牙本质黏附力的影响。
样本包括30颗龋损已扩展至牙本质的恒牙磨牙,随机分为三组(每组n = 10):1-使用旋转器械去龋(对照组);2-使用Papacárie Duo(巴西圣保罗F&A Laboratório Farmacêutico公司)去龋;3-使用Brix 3000™(阿根廷卡尔卡拉尼亚Brix S.R.L.公司)去龋。去龋后,将标本冲洗并干燥。以自酸蚀模式积极应用Scotchbond Universal™粘合剂(美国明尼苏达州圣保罗3M公司)并光照固化。使用硅橡胶模具(3×3×2 mm)施加复合树脂增量并光照固化。评估剪切粘结强度(MPa)、脱粘功(J/m)和剪切模量(kPa)。对于统计分析,显著性水平设定为5%。
与Brix 3000™组(5.72±1.55 MPa,p = 0.008)相比,对照组的剪切粘结强度值显著更高(8.50±2.69 MPa)。Papacárie Duo组(6.66±0.86 MPa)与其他组之间无显著差异(p>0.05)。关于脱粘功,Papacárie Duo组的结果(2944.41±450.21 J/m)显著高于Brix 3000™组(1189.41±504.13 J/m,p<0.001)和对照组(967.10±270.01 J/m,p<0.001)。关于剪切模量,对照组的结果(558.67±168.96 kPa)显著高于Brix 3000™组(339.79±143.78 kPa,p = 0.008)和Papacárie Duo组(223.04±127.30 kPa,p<0.001)。
虽然使用Papacárie Duo不会对复合树脂与恒牙牙本质的黏附产生负面影响,但使用Brix 3000™会降低黏附力,可能限制其临床应用。有必要进行进一步研究以阐明这些材料对牙本质基质的影响,特别是通过临床研究。