Comparison of remineralization ability of tricalcium silicate and of glass ionomer cement on residual dentin: an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the remineralization effects of a calcium silicate-based cement (Biodentine) and of a glass ionomer cement (GIC: Fuji IX) on artificially demineralized dentin. METHODS: Four standard cavities were prepared in dentin discs prepared from 34 extracted sound human third molars. In each disc, one cavity was covered with an acid-resistant varnish before demineralization (Group 1). The specimens were soaked in a chemical demineralization solution for 96 h to induce artificial carious lesions. Thereafter, one cavity each was filled with Biodentine (Group 2) and GIC (Group 3), respectively, and one carious lesion was left unrestored as a negative control (Group 4). Next, specimens were immersed in simulated body fluid (SBF) for 21 days. After cross-sectioning the specimens, the Ca/P ratio was calculated in each specimen by using scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDX). Finally, data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA with post-hoc Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Both cement types induced dentin remineralization as compared to Group 4. The Ca/P ratio was significantly higher in Group 2 than in Group 3 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The dentin lesion remineralization capability of Biodentine is higher than that of GIC, suggesting the usefulness of the former as a bioactive dentin replacement material. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Biodentine has a higher remineralization ability than that of GIC for carious dentin, and its interfacial properties make it a promising bioactive dentin restorative material.

Dentine Remineralisation Induced by "Bioactive" Materials through Mineral Deposition: An In Vitro Study.

This study aimed to assess the ability of modern resin-based "bioactive" materials (RBMs) to induce dentine remineralisation via mineral deposition and compare the results to those obtained with calcium silicate cements (CSMs). The following materials were employed for restoration of dentine cavities: CSMs: ProRoot MTA (Dentsply Sirona), MTA Angelus (Angelus), Biodentine (Septodont), and TheraCal LC (Bisco); RBMs: ACTIVA BioACTIVE Base/Liner (Pulpdent), ACTIVA Presto (Pulpdent), and Predicta Bioactive Bulk (Parkell). The evaluation of the mineral deposition was performed through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) on the material and dentine surfaces, as well as at the dentine-material interface after immersion in simulated body fluid. Additionally, the Ca/P ratios were also calculated in all the tested groups. The specimens were analysed after setting (baseline) and at 24 h, 7, 14, and 28 days. ProRoot MTA, MTA Angelus, Biodentine, and TheraCal LC showed significant surface precipitation, which filled the gap between the material and the dentine. Conversely, the three RBMs showed only a slight ability to induce mineral precipitation, although none of them was able to remineralise the dentine-material interface. In conclusion, in terms of mineral precipitation, modern "bioactive" RBMs are not as effective as CSMs in inducing dentine remineralisation; these latter represent the only option to induce a possible reparative process at the dentin-material interface.