Materials and Methods: This an in vitro study was done by preparing cavities on the buccocervical surface of 62 extracted premolar teeth which randomly assigned to two groups (n = 31) where Group 1 was restored with nanocomposite and Group 2 was cemented with porcelain cervical inlays. They were then subjected to thermocycling before immersion in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 h. Dye penetration depths were measured using Leica imaging system For statistical analysis, independent t-test was used to analyze the results (P < 0.05).
Results: Porcelain cervical inlay restorations demonstrated statistically lesser microleakage depth for the cervical margins (P = 0.018) when compared to CR. Deeper microleakage depth at the cervical compared to coronal margins of CR (P = 0.006) but no significant difference of both margins for porcelain cervical inlays (P = 0.600).
Conclusion: Porcelain cervical inlays show lesser microleakage than CR which could be alternative treatment option in restoring NCCL with better marginal seal and esthetics.
METHODS: Visible proximal surfaces of extracted human teeth were assessed by ICDAS-II before setting them in five manikin mouth models. Then contacting proximal surfaces in mouth models were assessed by BW and CS. Histological validation with polarized-light microscopy served as a gold standard. Pairwise comparisons were performed on area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the three methods, and corrected using Bonferroni's method. Sensitivities and specificities were compared using a test of proportions and AUC values were compared using DeLong's method.
RESULTS: The CS presented significantly higher sensitivity (0.933) than ICDAS-II (0.733, P = 0.01) and BW (0.267, P
Methods: Enamel and dentin bovine specimens were prepared and submitted to an at-home bleaching treatment using 9.5% hydrogen peroxide gel, which was applied daily (30 min/14 days). Concomitant with bleaching, an erosive cycle was performed using citric acid (0.3%, pH 3.8, 5 mins, 3×/day), followed by immersions in artificial saliva for remineralization (30 mins). Abrasion was done with two (high and low abrasiveness) dentifrices (2×/day, 120 seconds) after the first and third erosive immersion each day. Enamel and dentin softening were assessed by microhardness and erosive tooth wear by optical profilometry. Data were submitted to repeated measures ANOVA, followed by the Tukey's test with a significance level of 5%.
Results: For the enamel and considering the erosive-abrasive cycle, significant differences were found between the groups tested, the bleaching, and the abrasiveness of the dentifrice tested; however, the final microhardness values were significantly lower than the initial ones. For dentin, differences were found between the eroded/abrasion and the non-eroded/abrasion groups, with the former presenting lower microhardness values compared with the latter. In addition, bleaching decreased the microhardness values only for the highly abrasive dentifrice, and the final values were lower than for the initial ones for all tested groups.
Conclusion: The use of high and low abrasiveness dentifrices during bleaching and concomitant with erosion/abrasion cycles is more harmful to dentin than to enamel.
Clinical Relevance: Although bleaching is considered a conservative treatment, it can cause deleterious effects to dental hard tissue. The association of an at-home bleaching technique with erosion and high- or low- abrasive dentifrices harms dentin more than enamel.