Cargando…

The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing

Background and Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the combined effect of a 2% chlorhexidine aqueous solution and a universal adhesive system applied in self-etch and etch-and-rinse strategies on the composite resin–dentin interface. Materials and Methods: Class V cavities wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boaru, Mihai-Octavian, Tărăboanță, Ionuț, Stoleriu, Simona, Andrian, Sorin, Pancu, Galina, Nica, Irina, Sufaru, Irina-Georgeta, Iovan, Gianina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9963215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36837479
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59020278
_version_ 1784896197906923520
author Boaru, Mihai-Octavian
Tărăboanță, Ionuț
Stoleriu, Simona
Andrian, Sorin
Pancu, Galina
Nica, Irina
Sufaru, Irina-Georgeta
Iovan, Gianina
author_facet Boaru, Mihai-Octavian
Tărăboanță, Ionuț
Stoleriu, Simona
Andrian, Sorin
Pancu, Galina
Nica, Irina
Sufaru, Irina-Georgeta
Iovan, Gianina
author_sort Boaru, Mihai-Octavian
collection PubMed
description Background and Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the combined effect of a 2% chlorhexidine aqueous solution and a universal adhesive system applied in self-etch and etch-and-rinse strategies on the composite resin–dentin interface. Materials and Methods: Class V cavities were prepared on the facial and lingual surfaces of forty caries-free molars extracted for orthodontic reasons. The samples were randomly divided into two groups corresponding to the used etching protocol: I—etch-and-rinse; II—self-etch. In each tooth, one cavity was assigned for the control subgroups -IA (n = 20) and IIA (n = 20)—adhesive only, and the opposite cavity was pretreated with a 2% chlorhexidine solution—Gluco CHeX Cerkamed—subgroups IB (n = 20) and IIB (n = 20). Both sets of groups were restored using a universal adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive, 3M-ESPE) and a bulk-fill composite resin (Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative, 3M-ESPE). The roots and the pulp tissue were then removed, and a needle connected to a perfusor with 100 mL saline solution was used for pulp pressure simulation with a hydrostatic pressure of 20 cm H(2)O. Cariogenic attack was simulated using a demineralizing solution for 3 days at a constant temperature of 25 °C. The teeth were then sectioned in a facial-lingual direction and the microleakages at the occlusal and cervical margins were registered and scored using an optical Carl-Zeiss AXIO Imager A1m microscope (Carl-Zeiss). The composite resin–dentin interface was analyzed using a SEM Vega Tescan LMH II. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: Microleakage evaluation showed no significant differences among the study groups (p > 0.05). In subgroup IA, significant differences were recorded between occlusal and cervical margins (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Application of chlorhexidine on tooth substrate before using a universal bonding system in total etch or self-etch mode has no influence on the adhesive interface in the condition of cariogenic attack. The thickness of the adhesive resin layer seems to be less uniform when using chlorhexidine, but the morphological differences at the adhesive interface have no influence on the sealing capacity of the universal bonding system, regardless of the etching strategy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9963215
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99632152023-02-26 The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing Boaru, Mihai-Octavian Tărăboanță, Ionuț Stoleriu, Simona Andrian, Sorin Pancu, Galina Nica, Irina Sufaru, Irina-Georgeta Iovan, Gianina Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the combined effect of a 2% chlorhexidine aqueous solution and a universal adhesive system applied in self-etch and etch-and-rinse strategies on the composite resin–dentin interface. Materials and Methods: Class V cavities were prepared on the facial and lingual surfaces of forty caries-free molars extracted for orthodontic reasons. The samples were randomly divided into two groups corresponding to the used etching protocol: I—etch-and-rinse; II—self-etch. In each tooth, one cavity was assigned for the control subgroups -IA (n = 20) and IIA (n = 20)—adhesive only, and the opposite cavity was pretreated with a 2% chlorhexidine solution—Gluco CHeX Cerkamed—subgroups IB (n = 20) and IIB (n = 20). Both sets of groups were restored using a universal adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive, 3M-ESPE) and a bulk-fill composite resin (Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative, 3M-ESPE). The roots and the pulp tissue were then removed, and a needle connected to a perfusor with 100 mL saline solution was used for pulp pressure simulation with a hydrostatic pressure of 20 cm H(2)O. Cariogenic attack was simulated using a demineralizing solution for 3 days at a constant temperature of 25 °C. The teeth were then sectioned in a facial-lingual direction and the microleakages at the occlusal and cervical margins were registered and scored using an optical Carl-Zeiss AXIO Imager A1m microscope (Carl-Zeiss). The composite resin–dentin interface was analyzed using a SEM Vega Tescan LMH II. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: Microleakage evaluation showed no significant differences among the study groups (p > 0.05). In subgroup IA, significant differences were recorded between occlusal and cervical margins (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Application of chlorhexidine on tooth substrate before using a universal bonding system in total etch or self-etch mode has no influence on the adhesive interface in the condition of cariogenic attack. The thickness of the adhesive resin layer seems to be less uniform when using chlorhexidine, but the morphological differences at the adhesive interface have no influence on the sealing capacity of the universal bonding system, regardless of the etching strategy. MDPI 2023-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9963215/ /pubmed/36837479 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59020278 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Boaru, Mihai-Octavian
Tărăboanță, Ionuț
Stoleriu, Simona
Andrian, Sorin
Pancu, Galina
Nica, Irina
Sufaru, Irina-Georgeta
Iovan, Gianina
The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title_full The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title_fullStr The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title_full_unstemmed The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title_short The Influence of Chlorhexidine Gluconate Dentine Pre-Treatment on Adhesive Interface and Marginal Sealing
title_sort influence of chlorhexidine gluconate dentine pre-treatment on adhesive interface and marginal sealing
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9963215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36837479
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59020278
work_keys_str_mv AT boarumihaioctavian theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT taraboantaionut theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT stoleriusimona theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT andriansorin theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT pancugalina theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT nicairina theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT sufaruirinageorgeta theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT iovangianina theinfluenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT boarumihaioctavian influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT taraboantaionut influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT stoleriusimona influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT andriansorin influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT pancugalina influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT nicairina influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT sufaruirinageorgeta influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing
AT iovangianina influenceofchlorhexidinegluconatedentinepretreatmentonadhesiveinterfaceandmarginalsealing