Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud

Minimally invasive (MI) concepts in restorative dentistry in the year 2020 request from the practitioner, not only a scientifically supported rational for carious tissue removal/excavation and defect-oriented, biological cavity preparation, but also a deep understanding of how to ensure a biomechanically stable and durable restoration in different clinical situations by applying different restorative options. Bio-reactive materials play an increasingly relevant role, as they not only replace diseased or lost tissue but also optimise tissue mineral recovery (among other properties) when used in restorative and preventive dentistry. Indeed, this is of certain interest in MI restorative dentistry, especially in those cases where gap formation jeopardises the integrity of the margins along resin composite restorations, causing penetration of bacteria and eventually promoting the formation of secondary caries. Recently, the interest on whether ion-releasing materials may reduce such biofilm penetration into margin gaps and reduce such a risk for development and propagation of secondary caries is growing significantly among clinicians and scientists. The aim of this article was to explore mechanisms involved in the process that allow mineral deposition at the interface between such materials and dentine and describe how conventional “bioactive” restorative materials currently available on the market may beneficial treatments in MI Dentistry.

Background: The objective was to evaluate the e ciency of ProTaper Gold (PTG) and Reciproc Blue (RB) NiTi files in obturation material removal from straight root canals assessed by micro-computed tomography. Methods: Fifty-two anterior human teeth were shaped with a PTG rotary system until F2 (25/.08). Specimens were obturated with a continuous wave of condensation technique. For retreatment, specimens were randomly distributed in two experimental groups: PTG group (F4 file) and RB (R40 file). Micro-CT scans were performed before and after retreatment procedures. The percentage of the remaining obturation material compared to the original volume was calculated, as well as the retreatment time. The presence of separated files was recorded. A descriptive analysis was carried out, and nonparametric tests were employed. Results: The mean percentages of remaining obturation material in the PTG group and the RB group were 4.14 4.30% and 4.18 4.29%, respectively. The mean retreatment times for the PTG and RB groups were 144 51 and 163 88 s, respectively. There were no statistically significant di erences, neither in removal e ciency (p > 0.05) nor in retreatment time (p > 0.05), between the two groups. The coronal and middle thirds presented significantly more remaining obturation material than the apical third (p < 0.05). No file separation occurred. Conclusions: ProTaper Gold and Reciproc Blue present with comparable e ciency in removing the obturation material, with a similar mean retreatment time.

The aim of this study is to analyze and compare the e cacy of three non-surgical endodontic retreatment techniques in removing a carrier-based root canal filling material from straight root canal systems. The study was performed on 99 single-rooted extracted teeth using the ProTaper Gold endodontic rotary system up to the F2 file (Dentsply Maillefer, Baillagues, Switzerland), which were sealed with GuttaCore (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and AH plus epoxy resin sealer (Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany) and randomly assigned to the following non-surgical retreatment techniques: ProTaper Retreatment endodontic rotary instruments (D1–D3 files, Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland; n = 33, PTR), Reciproc Blue endodontic reciprocating instrument (R50, VDW, Munich, Germany; n = 33, RCB50), and a combined root canal retreatment technique between Gates-Glidden drills (sizes #3 and #2, Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and Hedstrom files (file size 35, 30, and 25, Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland; n = 33; H-GG). All of the teeth were submitted twice to a micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) scan, before and after non-surgical endodontic retreatment procedures. The volume of root canal filling material (mm3), volume of remaining root canal filling material (mm3), non-surgical endodontic retreatment working time (min), proportion of remaining root canal filling material (%), and e cacy of root canal filling material removal between the non-surgical endodontic retreatment techniques were analyzed using ANOVA one-way statistical analysis. Statistically significant di erences were observed between the proportions of remaining root canal filling material of PTR and H-GG (p = 0.018), between the non-surgical endodontic retreatment working times (min; p < 0.001), and between the e cacies of root canal filling material removal by the non-surgical endodontic retreatment techniques (p = 0.009). However, the non-surgical endodontic retreatment systems allow for similar carrier-based root canal filling material removal.

The aim of this study was to determine whether the residual presence of eugenol in coronal dentin may compromise the bond strength of resin-based restorative materials. A search was performed on MEDLINE/Pubmed, Scopus, and by hand search for relevant papers. No restriction was applied for language and publication date. The studies selected for analysis tested specimens with reduced size (micro-shear bond strength ( SBS) and micro-tensile bond strength ( TBS)) of adhesive systems and resin-based restorative materials applied to coronary dentin “contaminated” with eugenol-based materials. The search provided 335 articles, but only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled global analysis showed a significant influence of eugenol, as it negatively influenced the bond strength of resin-based restorations (5.79 (3.31–8.28) MPa, p < 0.00001). The subgroup analyses for conventional etch-and-rinse (p = 0.003) and self-etch (p < 0.0004) adhesive systems, as well as for SBS (p = 0.01) and TBS (p < 0.0001), showed a negative influence of eugenol on the bond strength. Data were statistically heterogeneous. However, it was possible to observe that eugenol could negatively a ect the bonding of resin-based restorative materials to dentin. Further evidence is necessary in order to acquire more accurate information about this issue and confirm that the residual presence of eugenol in dentin compromises the bond strength of resin-based materials.

This study aimed at evaluating the microtensile bond strength (MTBS) and fractographic features of dentine-bonded specimens created using universal adhesives applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) or self-etching (SE) mode in combination with modern ion-releasing resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC)-basedmaterials after load cycling and artificial saliva aging. Two universal adhesives (FTB: Futurabond M+, VOCO, Germany; SCU: Scotchbond Universal, 3M Oral Care, USA) were used. Composite build-ups were made with conventional nano-filled composite (AURA, SDI, Australia), conventional resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Ionolux VOCO, Germany), or a (RMGIC)-based composite (ACTIVA, Pulpdent, USA). The specimens were divided in three groups and immersed in deionized water for 24 h, load-cycled (350,000 cycles; 3 Hz; 70 N), or load-cycled and cut into matchsticks and finally immersed for 8 months in artificial saliva (AS). The specimens were cut into matchsticks and tested for microtensile bond strength. The results were analyzed statistically using three-way ANOVA and Fisher’s LSD post hoc test (p < 0.05). Fractographic analysis was performed through stereomicroscope and FE-SEM. FTB showed no significant drop in bond strength after aging. Unlike the conventional composite, the two RMGIC-based materials caused no bond strength reduction in SCU after load-cycle aging and after prolonged aging (8 months). The SEM fractographic analysis showed severe degradation, especially with composite applied on dentine bonded with SCU in ER mode; such degradation was less evident with the two GIC-based materials. The dentine-bond longevity may be influenced by the composition rather than the mode of application (ER vs. SE) of the universal adhesives. Moreover, the choice of the restorative material may play an important role on the longevity of the finalrestoration. Indeed, bioactive GIC-based materials may contribute to maintain the bonding performance of simplified universal adhesives over time, especially when these bonding systems are applied in ER mode.