Pit and Fissure Sealant Retention Following Air Abrasion Preparation with Bioactive Glass and Aluminum Oxide Particles.

PURPOSE: Alumina air abrasion is an alternative for acid-etch technique for tooth preparation before placement of a fissure sealant. The aim of this study was to compare the retention of sealants placed subsequent to air abrasion with alumina and bioactive glass (BAG) particles. METHODS: Sixty-two 6-12 year old children were included in this study. Using a halfmouth design, the fissures were prepared using air abrasion with alumina particles on randomly assigned permanent mandibular or/and maxillary first molars on one side of the mouth (Group 1) and air abrasion with BAG on the contralateral side of the mouth (Group 2). Sealants were applied on 180 teeth, and were scored as missing, partially retained, and completely retained after three, six, nine and 12 months. Data were analyzed using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: Sealant retention rates in the alumina group were higher than those in the BAG group at all time periods (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sealant retention after air abrasion with alumina particles was higher than BAG over 12 months.

Resin bonding using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives to decalcified deciduous enamel after bioactive glass air abrasion.

PURPOSE: Bioactive glass air abrasion is a conservative technique for removal of initial decalcified enamel superficial layer and caries vs alumina air abrasion. This study evaluated shear bond strength of composite resin to sound and decalcified deciduous enamel using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives after alumina and bioactive glass air abrasion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-six fat enamel surfaces, mounted in acrylic resin, were prepared from 48 deciduous molars. Half of the specimens were decalcified with a demineralizing solution. Both intact and decalcified specimens were assigned to two groups for alumina and bioactive glass air abrasion. In each group, the specimens were subdivided into two groups for application of Clearfil SE Bond or Optibond FL adhesives (n = 12). After composite resin bonding, the specimens underwent shear bond test. Data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), linear regression model and independent-sample t-test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in bond strength of composite resin after alumina or bioactive glass air abrasion (p = 0.272). Optibond FL adhesive and enamel decalcification produced higher bond strength (p = 0.000, p = 0.001 respectively). CONCLUSION: In this study, bioactive glass air abrasion produced bond strength comparable to the conventional method. This technique might be an alternative method for preparation of normal and/or decalcified enamel of deciduous teeth for resin bonding.

Flexural strength and morphological characteristics of resin-modified glass-ionomer containing bioactive glass.

INTRODUCTION: Recent advances in dental materials have led to the production of smart materials. Recently, addition of bioactive materials to glass-ionomer cements has resulted in new capabilities beyond the beneficial effects of fluoride release. This in vitro study compared the flexural strengths (FS) of a resin-modified glass-ionomer containing bioactive glass (RMGIBAG) with that of a commonly used resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of forty RMGI and RMGI-BAG bars (20 × 4 × 4 mm) were prepared in stainless steel molds. Each of the RMGI and RMGI-BAG bars was set for FS test. FS values of the specimens were measured using three-point bending test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The surface changes and the amounts of elements on the materials' surfaces were also evaluated by SEM/EDS analyses. Data were analyzed using SPSS 11.5 and t-test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The means ± SD in the study groups were 61.46 ± 22.52 and 39.90 ± 9.11 MPa respectively. There were significant differences between FS of the two study groups (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: While adding 20 wt% of BAG to the RMGI powder evaluated in this study decreases FS of the material significantly, the mean value of FS is in the acceptable range of the reported FS values for conventional GIs and RMGIs that are commercially available for clinical use. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: While flexural strength of RMGI decreases subsequent to addition of bioactive glass, it is still clinically acceptable considering the flexural strength values reported for clinically used GIs and RMGIs. Further studies are recommended.