The effects of caries removal techniques on volume-loss percentage and microtensile bond strength

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to calculate the volume loss percentages (VLP) regarding the ICDAS II system and various caries removal techniques (CRT) and to assess the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) in terms of VLP following CRT. Materials and methods: Three-dimensional data of human extracted molars were acquired with an extraoral dental scanner (Ineos x5, Dentsply Sirona) before and after the caries removal. Each ICDAS score group (0,3,4 and 5) was divided into four subgroups according to the CRT: stainless steel bur (Group S), ceramic bur (Group C), tungsten carbide bur (TCB) and air abrasion (AA) with bioactive-glass (Group TB), and TCB and AA with Al2O3 (Group TA). Pre and post-caries removal data were overlaid in a 3D modeling software and were volumetrically measured (n=10). Following the restoration, samples were prepared with non-trimming technique and subjected to microtensile testing. Results: ICDAS II scores were found related the VLP (p< 0.001) and the µTBS (p<0.001). CRT was not effective on VLP (p=0.110), whereas CRT type was significant on µTBS (p<0.001). In Group TA, a strong negative correlation was observed between the µTBS and the VLP for ICDAS 5 score (r=-0.919; p=0.027). Conclusions: ICDAS II can provide a preliminary indication for the amount of VLP and reduction in µTBS following caries removal. The use of 29 µm Al2O3 with air abrasion in deep caries removal may improve µTBS while potentially reducing the VLP.

Keywords

• Air abrasion
• caries removal technique
• dental scanner
• microtensile bond strength
• volume loss

References

1. Pitts NB, Ekstrand KR, Foundation I. International caries detection and assessment system (ICDAS) and its international caries classification and management system (ICCMS)-methods for staging of the caries process and enabling dentists to manage caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2013;41:e41-e52. google scholar
2. Yanıkoğlu F, Avcı H, Çelik ZC, Tağtekin D. Diagnostic performance of ICDAS II, fluorecam and ultrasound for flat surface caries with different depths. Ultrasound Med Biol 2020;46:1755-60. google scholar
3. Young DA, Novy BB, Zeller GG, Hale R, Hart TC, Truelove EL, Ekstrand KR, Featherstone JD, Fontana M, İsmail A. The American Dental Association Caries Classification System for clinical practice: A report of the american dental association council on scientific affairs. J Am Dent Assoc 2015;146:79-86. google scholar
4. Mount GJ. Minimal intervention (MI) in dentistry. J Minim Inter Dent 2011;4:102-4. google scholar
5. Schwendicke F, Paris S, Tu Y-K. Effects of using different criteria for caries removal: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent 2015;43:1-15. google scholar
6. Schwendicke F, Dörfer C, Paris S. Incomplete caries removal: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2013;92:306-14. google scholar
7. Foley J, Evans D, Blackwell A. Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: A randomised controlled clinical trial. Br Dent J 2004;197:697-701. google scholar
8. Phonghanyudh A, Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Petersen PE. Clinical evaluation of three caries removal approaches in primary teeth: A randomised controlled trial. Commun Dent Health 2012;29:173. google scholar

9. de Almeida Neves A, Coutinho E, Vivan Cardoso M, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Current concepts and techniques for caries excavation and adhesion to residual dentin. J Adhes Dent 2011;13:7. google scholar
10. Neuhaus KW, Ciucchi P, Donnet M, Lussi A. Removal of enamel caries with an air abrasion powder. Oper Dent 2010;35:538-46. google scholar
11. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Mattar D, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P. Microtensile bond strengths of an etch&rinse and self-etch adhesive to enamel and dentin as a function of surface treatment. Oper Dent 2003;28:647-60. google scholar
12. Antunes LAA, Pedro RL, Vieira ÂSB, Maia LC. Effectiveness of high speed instrument and air abrasion on different dental substrates. Braz Oral Res 2008;22:235-41. google scholar
13. Brunner TJ, Stark WJ, Boccaccini AR. Nanoscale bioactive silicate glasses in biomedical applications. İn: Kumar, Challa S. S. R. Editor, Nanomaterials for the life sciences. Weinheim: Wiley, 2009 p. 203-220. google scholar
14. Kulan M, Ulukapı I. Bioactive glasses in dentistry. Eur Oral Res 2011;45:65. google scholar
15. Banerjee A, Thompson I, Watson T. Minimally invasive caries removal using bio-active glass air-abrasion. J Dent 2011;39:2-7. google scholar
16. Banerjee A, Pabari H, Paolinelis G, Thompson ID, F Watson T. An in vitro evaluation of selective demineralised enamel removal using bio-active glass air abrasion. Clin Oral Investig 2011;15:895-900. google scholar
17. Sauro S, Watson TF, Thompson I, Banerjee A. One-bottle self-etching adhesives applied to dentine air-abraded using bioactive glasses containing polyacrylic acid: An in vitro microtensile bond strength and confocal microscopy study. J Dent 2012;40:896-905. google scholar
18. Spagnuolo G, Pires PM, Calarco A, Peluso G, Banerjee A, Rengo S, Boneta ARE, Sauro S. An in-vitro study investigating the effect of air-abrasion bioactive glasses on dental adhesion, cytotoxicity and odontogenic gene expression. Dent Mater 2021;37:1734-50. google scholar
19. Ritter AV. Sturdevant’s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry, 7th Ed., Missouri: Elsevier Publishing, 2019, p.479 google scholar
20. Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L, Viguie G, Viennot S, Robinson P, Farges J-C, Fages M, Ducret M. Intraoral scanner technologies: A review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng 2017;2017:8427595. doi: 10.1155/2017/8427595 google scholar
21. Yanıkoğlu F, Korkut B, Çelik Z, Çetinbay C, Erkan K, Kocaman A, Tağtekin D. Volumetric tissue loss of carious teeth scored with ICDAS II. Int J Sci Res 2018;7:486-489. google scholar
22. Park J, Choi D-S, Jang I, Yook H-T, Jost-Brinkmann P-G, Cha B-K. A novel method for volumetric assessment of tooth wear using three-dimensional reverse-engineering technology: A preliminary report. Angle Orthod 2014;84:687-92. google scholar
23. Hevinga M, Opdam N, Frencken J, Truin G, Huysmans M. Does incomplete caries removal reduce strength of restored teeth? J Dent Res 2010;89:1270-5. google scholar
24. Schwendicke F, Frencken J, Innes N. Current concepts in carious tissue removal. Curr Oral Health Rep 2018;5:154-62. google scholar
25. Oen KT, Thompson VP, Vena D, Caufield PW, Curro F, Dasanayake A, Ship JA, Lindblad A. Attitudes and expectations of treating deep caries: A pearl network survey. Gen Dent 2007;55:197-203. google scholar
26. Ceballos L, Camejo DG, Fuentes MV, Osorio R, Toledano M, Carvalho RM, Pashley DH. Microtensile bond strength of total-etch and self-etching adhesives to caries-affected dentine. J Dent 2003;31:469-77. google scholar
27. Neves AA, Coutinho E, De Munck J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Does diagnodent provide a reliable caries-removal endpoint? J Dent 2011;39:351-60. google scholar
28. Alleman DS, Magen P. A systematic approach to deep caries removal end points: The peripheral seal concept in adhesive dentistry. Quintessence Int 2012;43:197-208 google scholar
29. Çehreli ZC, Yazici AR, Akca T, Özgünaltay G. A morphological and micro-tensile bond strength evaluation of a single-bottle adhesive to caries-affected human dentine after four different caries removal techniques. J Dent 2003;31:429-35. google scholar
30. Sarr M, Kane AW, Vreven J, Mine A, Van Landuyt KL, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J. Microtensile bond strength and interfacial characterization of 11 contemporary adhesives bonded to bur-cut dentin. Oper Dent 2010;35:94-104. google scholar
31. Dorothy McComb B. Caries-detector dyes—how accurate and useful are they? J Can Dent Assoc 2000;66:195-8. google scholar
32. Karaarslan ES, Yildiz E, Cebe M, Yegin Z, Ozturk B. Evaluation of micro-tensile bond strength of caries-affected human dentine after three different caries removal techniques. J Dent 2012;40:793-801. google scholar
33. Şeker M, Alkan E, Tağtekin D, Korkut B, Yanıkoğlu F. Comparison of two different intraoral scanners for determination of caries related volume loss in caries removal. J Dent Indones 2023;30:99-106. google scholar
34. Thomas AR, Nagraj SK, Mani R, Haribabu R. Comparative evaluation of the efficiency of caries removal using various minimally invasive techniques with conventional rotary instruments using cone beam computed tomography: An in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2020;12:253. google scholar
35. Neves AA, Lourenço RA, Alves HD, Lopes RT, Primo LG. Caries-removal effectiveness of a papain-based chemo-mechanical agent: A quantitative micro-CT study. Scanning 2015;37:258-64. google scholar
36. Ashraf Y, Sabet A, Hamdy A, Ebeid K. Influence of preparation type and tooth geometry on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont 2020;29:800-4. google scholar
37. Banerjee A, Pabari H, Paolinelis G, Thompson ID, Watson TF. An in vitro evaluation of selective demineralised enamel removal using bio-active glass air abrasion. Clin Oral Investig 2011;15:895-900. google scholar