Topical application of Otosporin® before in-office bleaching: a split mouth, triple-blind, multicenter randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if the topical application of Otosporin® before in-office bleaching with a 35% hydrogen peroxide (HP) gel reduces the risk and intensity of tooth sensitivity (TS), as well as the bleaching effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty participants were selected for this split mouth, triple-blind, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Before each bleaching session, the placebo was applied in the patient's hemi-arch and the other half received the Otosporin®, according to the randomization procedure. Both products were applied topically for 10 min. The 35% HP was applied in two sessions with a 1-week interval. The risk and intensity of TS were assessed using the Numerical Scale (NRS) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The bleaching effectiveness were evaluated with the visual scales and with a digital spectrophotometer. The absolute risk of TS was compared by McNemar's test. To compare the intensity of TS, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate the NRS, while the paired t test was used to evaluate VAS. Bleaching effectiveness (ΔSGUs and ΔEab, ΔE00, and ΔWID) was compared between groups using the paired t-test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: No significant difference at risk (p = 1.0) and intensity of TS (p > 0.59; VAS and p = 1.00 for NRS) was detected between groups. For both groups, a significant bleaching was observed after 30 days of evaluation (p < 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: The previous application of Otosporin® in the in-office bleaching did not reduce the risk and intensity of TS and did not affect the effectiveness of the bleaching. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The application of Otosporin® before in-office bleaching with 35% HP was not able to reduce the risk and intensity of TS.

Influence of the mode of application of universal adhesive systems on adhesive properties to fluorotic enamel.

The objective of this study is to compare the resin-enamel bond strength (mµSBS), in-situ degree of conversion (DC), and the enamel-etching pattern (SEM/EDX) of universal adhesive systems when applied to sound and fluorotic enamel. Ninety-eight human molars were sectioned into 4 parts and divided into 24 groups according to 1) enamel surface (sound or fluorotic enamel), 2) adhesive system (Clearfil Universal Bond [CUB], Futurabond U [FBU], iBond Universal [IBU], and Scotchbond Universal [SBU]), and 3) application mode (etch-and-rinse [ER], active self-etch [Active-SE], and passive self-etch [Passive-SE]). Specimens were stored at 37 °C, for 24 hours and tested at 1.0 mm/min (µSBS). Enamel-resin interfaces were evaluated for in-situ DC. The enamel-etching pattern was evaluated under a SEM/EDX. Data from mµSBS and in-situ DC was analyzed using a three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5 % level of significance. For all adhesives, the ER resulted in a statistically significant higher mean mµSBS than the passive-SE in both substrates (p < 0.001). For all adhesives, active-SE resulted in mean mµSBS (p > 0.31) and in-situ DC (p > 0.45) that were statistically similar to those obtained with the ERs in both substrates. A statistically significant, higher mean mµSBS and in-situ DC were obtained in sound enamel (p < 0.001) than in fluorotic enamel. In general, SBU showed higher mean values for mµSBS and in-situ DC compared to those of CUB and IBU (p < 0.001). ER and active-SE showed the deepest enamel-etching pattern in both substrates. A higher amount of fluor was observed in fluorotic enamel. The active application of universal adhesives in the SE-mode may be a viable alternative to increase the adhesive properties in sound and fluorotic enamel.

Do Different Application Modes Improve the Bonding Performance of Self-etching Ceramic Primer to Lithium Disilicate and Feldspathic Ceramics?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of different application modes of a recently introduced self-etching ceramic primer on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) and ceramic surface-etching pattern of two glass-ceramic surfaces. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two CAD/CAM blocks of lithium disilicate (LD) and feldspathic glass ceramic (VTR) were each cut into 4 rectangular sections (n = 88 for ceramic surface). The LD and VTR specimens were divided into one control group (hydrofluoric acid + silane coupling agent [HF+SII]), and 10 experimental groups using Monobond Etch and Prime (MEP) applied for a combination of scrubbing times (5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 s) and reaction times (20 or 40 s). After each treatment, Tygon matrices (n = 8) were filled with a resin cement and light cured for each ceramic specimen. The specimens were stored in water at 37°C for 24 h and subjected to the µSBS test. The failure pattern and µSBS were statistically evaluated (α = 0.05). In addition, the ceramic surface etching pattern was analyzed using scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: For the LD groups, the application of MEP 60/40 resulted in a higher mean µSBS compared to HF+SI (p < 0.05). Groups 5/40, 10/40, and 20/40 resulted in mean µSBS similar to that obtained by HF+SI (p > 0.05). For VTR, no significant difference was observed among the groups (p = 0.32). Compared with MEP, HF better promoted the dissolution of glass matrix for both ceramics. However, prolonged MEP scrubbing or reaction caused significant dissolution of the glass matrix for both evaluated ceramics. CONCLUSION: Active and prolonged application of MEP may be a viable alternative to HF+SI for increasing the bond strength to LD.

Effect of Self-Etching Primer Associated to Hydrofluoric acid or Silane on Bonding to Lithium Disilicate.

To evaluate the effect of combining 5% hydrofluoric acid (HF) and silane (SI) with the self-etching ceramic primer on the immediate and after 1-year of water storage on bonding efficacy, conditioning pattern (CP) and chemical interaction (CI) to the lithium disilicate. A total of 16 CAD/CAM blocks of lithium disilicate (LD) were cut into four square sections (n=64). For bonding efficacy evaluation, the LD specimens were divided into 4 groups (n=10): 1) HF+SI; 2) self-etching ceramic primer (MEP); 3) HF+MEP; 4) MEP+SI. After each treatment, an adhesive system was applied and Tygon matrices were filled with a dual-cured resin cement followed by light curing. Cylinder specimens (0.8 mmx0.5mm) were stored in water (37 °C for 24 h or 1-year) and submitted to the µSBS test (2-way ANOVA and Tukey's test; a=0.05). CP and CI were only evaluated qualitatively. No significant difference on the µSBS was observed between groups (p=0.73), but reduced µSBS was observed after 1-year of water storage (p>0.0001). After application of HF+SI and MEP, reduction in a number of siloxane bonds was observed, suggesting the coupling of SI on the LD surface. HF or HF+MEP produced a higher dissolution of the glassy matrix than the use of MEP alone. The MEP can be an alternative to traditional ceramic treatment once the chemical interaction and long-term bond strength were similar between both groups. The association of hydrofluoric acid or silane with a self-etching ceramic primer did not add any benefits in terms of chemical interaction and bonding stability.

Effect of self-etching primer associated to hydrofluoric acid or silane on bonding to lithium disilicate

Abstract To evaluate the effect of combining 5% hydrofluoric acid (HF) and silane (SI) with the self-etching ceramic primer on the immediate and after 1-year of water storage on bonding efficacy, conditioning pattern (CP) and chemical interaction (CI) to the lithium disilicate. A total of 16 CAD/CAM blocks of lithium disilicate (LD) were cut into four square sections (n=64). For bonding efficacy evaluation, the LD specimens were divided into 4 groups (n=10): 1) HF+SI; 2) self-etching ceramic primer (MEP); 3) HF+MEP; 4) MEP+SI. After each treatment, an adhesive system was applied and Tygon matrices were filled with a dual-cured resin cement followed by light curing. Cylinder specimens (0.8 mmx0.5mm) were stored in water (37 °C for 24 h or 1-year) and submitted to the μSBS test (2-way ANOVA and Tukey's test; a=0.05). CP and CI were only evaluated qualitatively. No significant difference on the μSBS was observed between groups (p=0.73), but reduced μSBS was observed after 1-year of water storage (p>0.0001). After application of HF+SI and MEP, reduction in a number of siloxane bonds was observed, suggesting the coupling of SI on the LD surface. HF or HF+MEP produced a higher dissolution of the glassy matrix than the use of MEP alone. The MEP can be an alternative to traditional ceramic treatment once the chemical interaction and long-term bond strength were similar between both groups. The association of hydrofluoric acid or silane with a self-etching ceramic primer did not add any benefits in terms of chemical interaction and bonding stability.

Resumo Avaliar o efeito da combinação de ácido fluorídrico ou silano com o primer autocondicionante de cerâmicas sobre a eficácia da união imediata e após 1 ano de armazenamento em água, padrão de condicionamento e interação química desses tratamentos com o dissilicato de lítio. Um total de 16 blocos CAD/CAM de dissilicato de lítio (DL) foram cortados em quatro seções quadradas (n=64). Os espécimes de DL foram divididos em 4 grupos: 1) ácido fluorídrico a 5% + silano (HF + SI); 2) primer autocondicionante de cerâmica (MEP); 3) HF + MEP; 4) MPE + SI. Após cada tratamento, o sistema adesivo foi aplicado e as matrizes Tygon foram preenchidas com cimento resinoso dual (Variolink® II), seguido de fotopolimerização. Espécimes em forma de cilindro (0.8 mmÆ x 0.5 mm), foram armazenados em água (37 °C por 24h ou 1 ano) e submetidos ao teste μSBS (ANOVA dois fatores e teste de Tukey; a=0,05). Para avaliação das interações químicas por Espectroscopia Raman, os espécimes de DL foram divididos em 3 grupos (n=4): 1) sem tratamento (DL); 2) HF + SI; e 3) MEP. Para avaliação do padrão de condicionamento da superfície cerâmica após os tratamentos por MEV, os espécimes de DL foram divididos em 3 grupos (n=3): 1) DL; 2) HF; 3) MEP; e 4) HF + MEP. Ambos os métodos foram avaliados apenas qualitativamente. Não foi observada diferença significativa na μSBS imediata entre os grupos (p=0,73), mas após 1 ano de armazenamento das amostras em água, reduziu μSBS (p>0,0001). HF ou HF + MEP produziram uma maior dissolução da matriz vítrea do que o uso de MEP sozinho. Após a aplicação de SI e MEP, observou-se redução de ligações de siloxano, sugerindo o acoplamento da camada de silano na superfície do DL. O primer autocondicionante cerâmico pode ser uma alternativa ao tratamento cerâmico tradicional, uma vez que a interação química e a resistência de união a longo prazo, quando comparada ao tratamento tradicional foram estatisticamente semelhantes. A associação de ácido fluorídrico ou agente de acoplamento silano com um primer autocondicionante de cerâmicas não agregou nenhum benefício em termos de interação química e estabilidade.