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).
|Journal||American Journal of Dentistry|
|Publication status||Published - 2018|