Evaluation of the clinical success of class I cavities prepared by an Er:YAG laser-5-year follow-up study

Clinical effects of laser-based cavity preparation on class V resin-composite fillings

The aim of the present clinically controlled two-year study was to investigate the influence of laser-based cavity preparation on the long-term performance of Class V resin-composite fillings. Class V non-carious lesions (n = 75) were randomly assigned to two test and one control group. Cavities in both test groups were prepared using an Er,Cr:YSGG laser (Waterlase MD, Biolase, Irvine, California, USA). The device was operated at 3 W (150 mJ, 30 J/cm²), 50% water, 60% air, 30 Hz in H mode. Subsequently, laser-prepared tooth surfaces in test group I (n = 21) were additionally conditioned by acid etching (etch-and-rinse). Laser-prepared cavities of test group II (n = 21) received no additional acid conditioning. After application of an adhesive, all cavities were restored using the resin-composite Venus®. For cavities in the control group (n = 33) conventional diamond burs were used for preparation which was followed by an etch-and-rinse step, too. The fillings were evaluated immediately (baseline) and after 6, 12 and 24 months of wear according to the C-criteria of the USPHS-compatible CPM-index. The results showed that after 24 month of wear, laser-preparation was associated with fillings of high clinical acceptability. Compared to conventional bur-based treatment, laser-based cavity preparation resulted in fillings with high marginal integrity and superior marginal ledge configurations (p = 0.003). Furthermore, laser-preparation combined with additional acid-conditioning (test group I) resulted in fillings with the best marginal integrity and the lowest number in marginal discoloration, especially at the enamel-composite margins (p = 0.044). In addition, total loss of fillings was also less frequently observed in both laser groups as compared to the control. The results clearly demonstrate that laser-based cavity preparation will benefit the clinical long-time performance of Class V resin-composite fillings. Furthermore, additional acid-conditioning after laser preparation is of advantage.

Four-year clinical prospective follow-up of resin composite restoration after selective caries removal using Er:YAG laser

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to longitudinally evaluate, after a 4-year period, the clinical longevity of composite resin restoration compared to the baseline, after selective caries removal in permanent molars using Er:YAG laser or bur preparation with biomodification of dentin with the use of chlorhexidine.

METHODS

Selective caries removal was performed on 80 teeth of 20 individuals who each had at least four active carious lesions. These lesions, located on occlusal surfaces of permanent molar counterparts, were removed using (i) Er:YAG laser biomodified with chlorhexidine, (ii) Er:YAG laser and application of deionized water, (iii) bur preparation biomodified with chlorhexidine, and (iv) bur preparation and application of deionized water. At the end of 4 years, 64 of the 80 restorations were evaluated in 16 individuals (n = 16). The restorations were evaluated, both clinically and photographically, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and pulp vitality analysis. The experimental data were statistically evaluated by kappa, Fisher's, and chi-square tests, with a significance level of 5%. The Kaplan-Meier test and the Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the survival of the restorations.

RESULTS

After 4 years of follow-up, there was a statistically significant difference in marginal discoloration criteria for all of the groups evaluated. For marginal adaptation criteria, there was a statistically significant difference for the Er:YAG laser group biomodified with chlorhexine (p = 0.050). For clinical and radiographic evaluation of pulp vitality, there were no statistically significant differences among the groups (p = 0.806).

CONCLUSION

Er:YAG laser can be used for selective caries removal, regardless of dentin biomodification with chlorhexidine or application of deionized water, once it produced promising results in composite resin restorations after 4 years of follow-up, according to the criteria evaluated. The selective caries removal using Er:YAG laser or bur and the biomodification of dentin with the use of chlorhexidine did not influence the survival of composite resin restorations after the 4-year follow-up period.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Composite resin restorations applied after selective caries removal using Er:YAG laser or burs, regardless of dentin biomodification with the use of chlorhexidine or application of deionized water, showed adequate clinical behavior after 4 years of follow-up.

Selective Removal of Necrotic Dentin in Primary Teeth Using Laser Irradiation: One-Year Clinical Evaluation of Composite Restorations

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the child's salivary cortisol levels, clinical performance and marginal adaptation of restorations after selective removal of necrotic dentin in primary teeth using Er: YAG laser irradiation. Methods: A double-blind clinical study was performed in children at 7-10 years. Children who had at least 2 teeth with carious lesions involving the occlusal and proximal surfaces of primary molars counterparts were selected. Removal of necrotic dentin was performed by 2 methods: Er: YAG laser irradiation and bur-preparation. Cortisol levels (n =24) was evaluated by ELISA. Clinical analysis (n =20) was performed after the restorations polish, 6 and 12 months after restorative procedure using United States Public Health Service (USPHS) method and photographs. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to analyz the marginal gap formation (n =20). The analysis of the data was performed by 95% confidence interval, Shapiro-Wilk test, Friedman and Wilcoxon post hoc tests (α =5%). Results: Cortisol levels were higher during selective removal of necrotic dentin, regardless of the method used (P>0.05). After 12 months, there was no evidence of the difference in the restorations performed on cavities prepared by both methods. SEM analysis revealed that the laser-irradiated teeth showed 10% of gaps in the full extent of restoration. For bur-prepared teeth, 20% of gaps were found at the cavosurface margin. Conclusion: The salivary cortisol levels on children that received Er: YAG laser irradiation for removal the necrotic dentin was similar to the control group. Class II restorations evaluated after 1 year period did not suffer interference by the use of Er: YAG laser irradiation.

Clinical evaluation of composite restorations in Er:YAG laser-prepared cavities re-wetting with chlorhexidine

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate longitudinally the composite restorations, performed in cavities prepared by Er:YAG or conventional bur, and dentin re-wetting with water or chlorhexidine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty individuals with four active caries with cavitation reaching the dentin located on the occlusal surface of molars counterparts are selected. The teeth of each individual were randomly assigned into four groups: (I) Er:YAG laser (260 mJ/4 Hz) re-wetting with chlorhexidine, (II) Er:YAG laser (260 mJ/4 Hz) re-wetting with deionized water, (III) conventional method re-wetting with chlorhexidine, and (IV) conventional method re-wetting with deionized water. The teeth were isolated, prepared cavities, phosphoric acid etching, and re-wetting according to previously assigned method. Restoration was performed employing the Single Bond 2 and Z350XT resin. Clinical follow-up was held after the polishing of the restoration (baseline) and 6 and 12 months of the making of the restoration using the modified USPHS criteria. The restorations were qualitatively analyzed by means of photographs. In the evaluation period, replicas of the restorations were analyzed by SEM. Data were analyzed by statistics using chi-square test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

After 12 months of clinical evaluation, groups prepared with laser and re-wetting with chlorhexidine and water showed the lowest marginal staining value. There was no statistical difference between the groups for other factors. SEM analysis revealed that a non-expressive amount of restorations showed gaps and irregularities of tooth-restoration interface after 6 and 12 months compared to the baseline.

CONCLUSION

The restorations performed in laser-prepared cavities, regardless of the re-wetting, presented the best clinical performance over the evaluated period.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Laser-prepared teeth, regardless of re-wetting, showed greater resistance to marginal discoloration.