Article Data

  • Views 580
  • Dowloads 152

Original Research

Open Access

Hybrid Layer Width after Conventional Diamond, Carbide and Ultra-Sound CVD Burs

  • Pereira Nogueira P1
  • Cavalli V1
  • Liporoni PCS1
  • do Rego MA1,*,

1University of Taubaté, Taubaté, São Paulo, Brazil

DOI: 10.17796/jcpd.37.1.c86g515t1q576452 Vol.37,Issue 1,January 2013 pp.53-58

Published: 01 January 2013

*Corresponding Author(s): do Rego MA E-mail: marcosrego@uol.com.br

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate hybrid layer thickness of primary molars sectioned with diamond, carbide and ultrasonic CVD burs. Study Design: The occlusal enamel surfaces of ten molars were removed and superficial dentin was exposed. Three standardized cavities were prepared at mesial, central and distal exposed dentin with diamond, carbide and ultrasonic CVD burs, respectively. A self-etching adhesive system (Adhese, Ivoclar/Vivadent) was applied to prepared cavities and composite resin Z100 (3M/ESPE) was inserted according to manufacturers’ instructions to hybridized dentin. Samples were lightcured and the crown was sectioned mesio-distally dividing the restored cavities in two halves which were observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM), in order to quantitatively evaluate hybrid layer thickness (µm). Three repeated measures were performed at mesial, central and distal sites and mean values obtained were submitted to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: Data (mean ± sd) obtained were (µm): 2.69 (0.44), 3.38 (1.23) and 2.72 (1.18) for diamond, carbide and CVD burs, respectively. No differences were observed among groups (p ≯ 0.05). The adhesive systems promoted mechanical retention, uniform and continuous hybrid layer and resin tags formation at all dentin sites for all instruments tested. Conclusion: The results suggest that the minimally invasive cavities prepared with diamond, carbide and CVD for ultrasound, promoted hybrid layer formation with a similar thickness regardless the bur used.

Keywords

primary teeth, adhesive system, hybrid layer, CVD diamond burs

Cite and Share

Pereira Nogueira P,Cavalli V,Liporoni PCS,do Rego MA. Hybrid Layer Width after Conventional Diamond, Carbide and Ultra-Sound CVD Burs. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2013. 37(1);53-58.

References

1. Agostini  FG,  Kaaden  C,  Powers  JM.  Bond  strength  of  self-etching primers to enamel and dentin of primary teeth. Pediatr Dent, 23: 481–6, 2001.

2. Albaladejo A, Osorio R, Toledano M, Ferrari M. Hybrid layers of etch-and-rinse  versus  self-etching  adhesive  systems.  Med  Oral  Patol  Oral Cir Bucal, 15: 112–8, 2009.

3. Antonio AG, Primo LG, Maia LC. Case report: ultrasonic cavity prepa-ration  –  an  alternative  approach  for  caries  removal  in  pediatric  den-tistry. Eur J Paediatr Dent, 6: 105–8, 2005. 

4. Borges CFM, Magne P, Pfender E, Heberlein J. Dental diamond burs made with a new technology. J Prosthet Dent, 82: 73–79, 1999.

5. Bortolotto T, Ferrari M, Susin A, Krejci I. Morphology of the smear layer after the application of simplified self-etch adhesives on enamel and  dentin  surfaces  created  with  different  preparation  methods.  Clin Oral Investig, 13: 409–17, 2009.

6. Breschi  L,  Mazzoni A,  Ruggeri A,  Cadenaro  M,  Di  Lenarda  R,  De Stefano Dorigo E. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater, 24: 90–101, 2007. 

7. Bussato ALS. Dentistry, philosophy, concepts and clinical practice. Ed. Artes Médicas, São Paulo, 125–146, 2005. 

8. Carvalho CA, Fagundes TC, Barata TJ, Trava-Airoldi VJ, Navarro MF. The  use  of  CVD  diamond  burs  for  ultraconservative  cavity  prepara-tions: a report of two cases. J Esthet Restor Dent, 19: 19–28, 2007.

9. Carvalho RM, Chersoni S, Frankenberger R, Pashley DH, Prati C, Tay FR. A challenge to the conventional wisdom that simultaneous etching and  resin  infiltration  always  occurs  in  self-etch  adhesives. Biomaterials, 26: 1035–42, 2005.

10. Diniz  MB,  Rodrigues  JA,  Chinelatti  MA,  Cordeiro  RCL.  Marginal microleakage in cavities prepared with CVDentUS® and conventional diamonds burs. Cienc Odontol Bras, 8: 75–81, 2005.

11. Ferrari M, Cagidiaco M, Mason PN. Morphologic aspects of the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone with five different dentin adhesive systems tested in vivo. J Prosthet Dent, 71: 404–8, 1994.

12. Ferrari M, Davidson Cl. In vivo resin-dentin interdiffusion and tag for-mation with lateral branches of two adhesive systems. J Prosthet Dent, 76: 250–3, 1996.

13. Hirayama A. Experimental analytical electron microscopic studies on the quantitative analysis of elemental concentrations in biological thin specimens and its application on dental science. Shikywa Gahuko, 90: 1019–36,1990.

14. Jackson MJ, Sein H, Ahmed W. Diamond coated dental bur machining of natural and synthetic dental materials. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 15: 1323–31, 2004.

15. Lima  LM,  Motisuki  C,  Santos-Pinto  L,  Santos-Pinto  A,  Corat  EJ. Cutting characteristics of dental diamond burs made with CVD tech-nology. Braz Oral Res, 20: 155–61, 2006.

16. Linden LA, Bjõrkman S, Hattab F. The diffusion in vitro of fluoride and chlorhexidine in the enamel of human deciduous and permanent teeth. Arch Oral Biol, 31: 33–37, 1986.

17. Marquezan M, da Silveira BL, Burnett LH Jr., Rodrigues CR, Kramer PF. Microtensile bond strength of contemporary adhesives to primary enamel and dentin. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 32: 127–32, 2008.

18. Nakabayashi N, Ashizawa M, Nakamura M. Identification of a resin-dentin hybrid layer in vital human dentin creates in vivo: durable bond-ing to vital dentin. Quintessence Int, 23: 135–41, 1992.

19. Pedro R de L, Antunes LA, Maia LC. Analysis of primary and perma-nent molars prepared with high speed and ultrasonic abrasion systems. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 32: 49–52, 2007.

20. Reis  AF,  Giannini  M,  Pereira  PN.  Long-term  TEM  analysis  of  the nanoleakage  patterns  in  resin-dentin  interfaces  produced  by  different bonding strategies. Dent Mater, 23: 1164–72, 2007.

21. Rocha PI, Borges AB, Rodrigues JR, Arrais CA, Giannini M. Effect of dentinal surface preparation on bond strength of self-etching adhesive systems. Braz Oral Res, 20: 52–8, 2006. 

22. Sattabanasuk V, Vachiramon V,  Qian  F, Armstrong  SR.  Resin-dentin bond  strength  as  related  to  different  surface  preparation  methods.  J Dent, 35: 467–75, 2007.

23. Sensi LG, Marson FC, Belli R, Baratieri LN, Monteiro S Jr. Interfacial morphology of self-etching adhesive systems in dentin. Quintessence Int, 38: 112–9, 2007.

24. Shimada Y,  Senawongse  P,  Harnirattisai  C,  Burrow  MF,  Nakaoki Y, Tagami J. Bond strength of two adhesive systems to primary and per-manent enamel. Oper Dent, 27: 403–9, 2002.

25. Soares  FZ,  Rocha  RDE  O,  Raggio  DP,  Sadek  FT,  Cardoso  PE. Microtensile  bond  strength  of  different  adhesive  systems  to  primary and permanent dentin. Pediatr Dent, 27: 457–62, 2005.

26. Vieira  ASB,  Santos  MPA,  Antunes  LAA,  Primo  LG,  Maia  LC. Preparation time and sealing effect of cavities prepared by an ultrasonic device  and  high-speed  diamond  Rotary  cutting  system.  J  Oral  Sci 49:207-11, 2007. 

27. Vieira D, Vieira D. Pontas de diamante CVD: início do fim da alta rota-ção? J Am Dent Assoc, 5: 307–13, 2002.

28. Wang LG, Tang R, Bonstein T, Bush P, and G.H Nancollas. Enamel demineralization  in  primary  and  permanent  teeth.  J  Dent  Res,  85: 359–63, 2006.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top