Effectiveness of different removal methods of artificially demineralized dentin
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7308/aodontol/2014.50.2.01Keywords:
Tooth demineralization, Dental cavity preparation, Hardness testsAbstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of different mechanical methods for the removal of demineralized dentin.
Methods: Healthy human third molars were prepared in such a way that the flat occlusal surfaces of the dentin were exposed and longitudinally sectioned in a vestibular-lingual direction. One section of each tooth was submitted to the pH-cycling model, while the other section was kept intact. The tooth sections were joined, and a single operator performed dentin removal using a steel bur, a hand instrument, or a polymer bur. The tooth’s sections were then separated, and digital images were obtained. The depth of the prepared cavities and the microhardness measurements were checked and analyzed statistically using the Kruskal-Wallis One-Way ANOVA in Ranks, the Tukey test, while desmineralized dentin were compared using the One-Way ANOVA, and the Holm-Sidak method (p < 0.05).
Results: The steel bur produced the deepest cavities in mineralized and demineralized dentin. The polymer bur generated the shallowest cavities in demineralized dentin. The measurements of microhardness of the deepest surfaces of the cavities prepared in demineralized dentin indicated that the steel bur and hand instrument presented similar values, while those values produced by polymer burs proved to be lower.
Conclusion: The effectiveness of the removal of demineralized dentin varied among the three methods used in this study. The polymer bur proved to be the most conservative of the methods used. By contrast, the steel bur and hand instrument showed a similar effectiveness in the removal of dentin, according to the microhardness of the remaining dentin, even though they produced different cavity depths.
References
Fusayama T, Okuse K, Hosoda H. Relationship between hardness, discoloration, and microbial invasion in carious dentin J Dent Res. 1966; 45:1033-46.
Murdoch-Kinch CA, McLean ME. Minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134:87-95.
Bussadori SK, Castro LC, Galvão AC. Papain gel: a new chemo-mechanical caries removal agent. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2005; 30:115-9.
Neves AA, Coutinho E, De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B. Caries-removal effectiveness and minimal-invasiveness potential of cariesexcavation techniques: a micro-CT investigation. J Dent. 2011a; 39:154-62.
Mount GJ. Minimal intervention dentistry: rationale of cavity design. Oper Dent. 2003; 28:92-9.
Silva NR, Carvalho RM, Pegoraro LF, Tay FR,Thompson VP. Evaluation of a self-limiting concept in dentinal caries removal. J Dent Res. 2006; 85:282-6.
Boston DW. New device for selective dentin caries removal. Quintessence Int. 2003; 34:678- 85.
Allen KL, Salgado, TL, Janal MN, Thompson VP. Removing carious dentin using polymer instrument without anesthesia versus a carbide bur with anesthesia. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005; 136:643-51.
Marquezan M, Corrêa FN, Sanabe ME, Rodrigues Filho LE, Hebling J, Guedes-Pinto AC, et al. Artificial methods of dentine caries induction: a hardness and morphological comparative study. Arch Oral Biol. 2009; 54:1111-7.
Ten Cate JM. In vitro studies of the effects of fluoride on de- and remineralization. J Dent Res. 1990; 69:634-6.
Ten Cate JM, Duijsters PP. Alternating demineralization and remineralization of artificial enamel lesions. Caries Res. 1982; 16:201-10.
White DJ. The application of in vitro models to research on demineralization and remineralization of the teeth. Adv Dent Res. 1995; 9:175-93.
Argenta RM, Tabchoury CP, Cury JA. A modified pH cycling model to evaluate fluoride effect on enamel demineralization. Pesqui Odontol Bras. 2003; 17:241-6.
Banerjee A, Kidd EA, Watson TF. In vitro validation of carious dentin removed using different excavation criteria. Am J Dent. 2003; 16:228-30.
Craig RG, Gehring PE, Peyton FA. Relation of structure to the microhardness of human dentin. J Dent Res. 1959; 38:624-30.
Celiberti P, Francescut P, Lussi A. Performance of four dentine excavation methods in deciduous teeth. Caries Res. 2006; 40:117-23.
Zhang X, Tu R, Yin W, Zhou X, Li X, Hu D. Micro-computerized tomography assessment of fluorescence aided caries excavation (FACE) techniques. Aust Dent J. 2013; 58:461-7.
Banerjee A, Kellow S, Mannocci F, Cook RJ, Watson TF. An in vitro evaluation of microtensile bond strengths of two adhesive bonding agents to residual dentine after caries removal using three excavation techniques. J Dent. 2010a; 38:480-9.
Cajazeira MRR, Santos MEO. Ultrastructural analysis of the dentin surface of primary molarssubmitted to different methods udes for removal of carious tissue. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clin Integr. 2007; 7:265-9.
Banerjee A, Sherriff M, Kidd EA, Watson TF. A confocal microscopic study relating the autofluorescence of carious dentine to its microhardness. Br Dent J. 1999; 187:206-10.
Buzalaf MA, Hannas AR, Magalhães AC, Rios D, Honório HM, Delbem AC. pH-cycling models for in vitro evaluation of the efficacy of fluoridated dentifrices for caries control: strengths and limitations. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010; 18:316-34.
Mount, GJ. A new paradigm for operative dentistry. Aust Dent J. 2007; 52:264-70.
Neves AA, Coutinho E, Cardoso MV, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Current concepts and techniques for caries excavation and adhesion to residual dentin. J Adhes Dent. 2011b; 13:7-22.
Banerjee A, Cook R, Kellow S, Shah K, Festy F, Sherriff M, et al. A confocal micro-endoscopic investigation of the relationship between the microhardness of carious dentine and its autofluorescence. Eur J Oral Sci. 2010b; 118:75- 9.
Fuentes V, Toledano M, Osorio R, Carvalho RM. Microhardness of superficial and deep sound human dentin. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003; 66:850-3.
