Shear Bond Comparison between 4 Bioceramic Materials and Dual-cure Composite Resin.

INTRODUCTION: Bioceramic materials have shown biologic and physical properties favorable for regenerative treatment. A key to treatment success is an adequate restoration to prevent microleakage; however, research is limited regarding the bond strength between restorative and bioceramic materials used in regenerative procedures. This study compared the bond strength between 4 bioceramic materials and a dual-cure composite resin. METHODS: Eighty wells in Teflon (ePlastics, San Diego, CA) blocks were filled with bioceramic materials representing 4 groups: White ProRoot mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK), Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur des Fosses, France), EndoSequence Root Repair Material Fast Set Putty (Brasseler USA, Savannah, GA), and NeoMTA (Avalon Biomed Inc, Houston, TX). After allowing samples to set according to the manufacturers' instructions, exposed surfaces of the bioceramic materials were prepared using ClearFil SE Bond (Kuraray America, Inc., New York, NY) followed by restoration with ClearFil DC Core Plus (Kuraray America, Inc.). To test shear bond strength, each block was secured in a universal testing machine, and the crosshead was advanced at 0.5 mm/min until fracture. Newton peak force was recorded and megapascals calculated followed by data comparison. RESULTS: The mean shear bond strengths between ClearFil DC Core Plus and the bioceramic materials were as follows: White ProRoot MTA, 7.96 MPa; Biodentine, 9.18 MPa; EndoSequence Root Repair Material Fast Set Putty, 4.47 MPa; and NeoMTA, 5.72 MPa. White ProRoot MTA and Biodentine were statistically similar, with a higher stress bond strength than NeoMTA, which had a statistically greater bond strength than EndoSequence Root Repair Material. All these values were lower than typical bond strengths shown for dentin-composite resin bonding. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of which bioceramic material to use in regenerative procedures should be based on factors other than the bond between that material and the overlying coronal resin restoration.

Antimicrobial susceptibility of monoculture biofilms of a clinical isolate of Enterococcus faecalis.

The purpose of this study was to create a monoculture biofilm of a clinical isolate of Enterococcus faecalis and to determine susceptibility against four antimicrobial irrigants. Biofilms were subjected to 1-, 3-, and 5-minute exposures to one of the following irrigants: 6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) or one of two new products, <6% NaOCl with surface modifiers (Chlor-XTRA) or 2% CHX with surface modifiers (CHX-Plus) (Vista Dental Products, Racine, WI). It was hypothesized that NaOCl and CHX would be equally effective and that addition of surface modifiers would improve bactericidal activity of the respective irrigants compared to the original formulations. Results indicate that 6% NaOCl and Chlor-EXTRA were significantly superior against E. faecalis biolfilms compared to 2% CHX and CHX-Plus at all time points except five minutes.

The effect of endodontic solutions on resorcinol-formalin paste in teeth.

This study determined if any of six endodontic solutions would have a softening effect on resorcinol-formalin paste in extracted teeth, and if there were any differences in the solvent action between these solutions. Forty-nine single-rooted extracted teeth were decoronated 2 mm coronal to the CEJ, and the roots sectioned apically to a standard length of 15 mm. Canals were prepared to a 12 mm WL and a uniform size with a #7 Parapost drill. Teeth were then mounted in a cylinder ring with acrylic. The resorcinol-formalin mixture was placed into the canals and was allowed to set for 60 days in a humidor. The solutions tested were 0.9% sodium chloride, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite, chloroform, Endosolv R (Endosolv R), 3% hydrogen peroxide, and 70% isopropyl alcohol. Seven samples per solution were tested and seven samples using water served as controls. One drop of the solution was placed over the set mixture in the canal, and the depth of penetration of a 1.5-mm probe was measured at 2, 5, 10, and 20 min using a dial micrometer gauge. A repeated-measures ANOVA showed a difference in penetration between the solutions at 10 min (p = 0.04) and at 20 min (p = 0.0004). At 20 min, Endosolv R, had significantly greater penetration than 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (p = 0.0033) and chloroform (p = 0.0018); however, it was not significantly better than the control (p = 0.0812). Although Endosolv R, had statistically superior probe penetration at 20 min, the softening effect could not be detected clinically at this time.