Polymers (Sep 2021)

Anti-Demineralization Effects of Dental Adhesive-Composites on Enamel–Root Dentin Junction

  • Yu-Jung Lai,
  • Rena Takahashi,
  • Po-Yen Lin,
  • Ling Kuo,
  • Yuan Zhou,
  • Khairul Matin,
  • Yu-Chih Chiang,
  • Yasushi Shimada,
  • Junji Tagami

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13193327
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 19
p. 3327

Abstract

Read online

Oral biofilm reactor (OBR) and pH cycling (pHC) artificial caries model were employed to evaluate the anti-demineralization effects of four composite filling systems on enamel–root dentin junction. Sixty-four enamel–root dentin blocks (6 mm × 6 mm × 2 mm) each with a cylindrical cavity were randomly assigned to the pHC and OBR group, then four subgroups (n = 8) and filled with either the Beautifil II (BEF, SPRG-filler-containing) or Estelite (EST) composite after the adhesive (either Single Bond Universal (SBU) or FL Bond II (FL, SPRG-filler-containing)). The demineralization lesions of filling interface were examined by micro-computerized tomography (μCT) and swept-source-optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). According to the degree of interface damage, the caries lesions were sorted into four types: Type A and B (no attachment loss); Type C and D (attachment loss). EST/SBU showed the worst demineralization lesion and attachment loss (100% Type D), while BEF/FL exhibited the shallowest lesion depth (p < 0.05, 145 ± 45 μm on enamel, 275 ± 35 μm on root dentin) and no attachment loss (75% Type A and 25% Type B). Using FL adhesive alone does not effectively reduce enamel demineralization. BEF plays a leading role in acid resistance. The combination of BEF and FL showed a cumulative synergistic effect on anti-demineralization.

Keywords