Efficacy of photodynamic therapy, photobiomodulation and antimicrobial agent on the shear bond strength of composite restorations to hypomineralized teeth

Effect of photodynamic therapy with two photosensitizers on the microtensile bond strength of a universal adhesive to affected dentin

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of photodynamic therapy (PDT) using two photosensitizers, methylene blue and indocyanine green, on the microtensile bond strength of a universal adhesive to caries-affected dentin.

METHODS

The occlusal enamel of 60 third molars was cut to expose the inner one-third of the dentin. Artificial caries were induced through a pH cycling process. The samples were divided into three groups: M (Methylene blue+ diode laser), I (Indocyanine green agents+ diode laser irradiation), and control. Each group was further divided into two subgroups according to the adhesive protocol (self-etch, total-etch). After restoring with Gradia composite resin, teeth were sectioned and exposed to 5000 thermal cycles. Microtensile bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine. The data were subjected to two- and one-way ANOVA and paired comparisons were performed by the Tamhane and Tukey tests.

RESULTS

The study found significant effects of the photosensitizer, etching pattern, and their interactions on the microtensile bond strength of composite resin to caries-affected dentin (P < 0.001). In the self-etching mode, PDT with indocyanine green exhibited significantly higher bond strength values compared to PDT with methylene blue (P = 0.001) and the control groups (P < 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed in the total-etch mode. (P = 0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

The etching mode played a more significant role in the bond strength when using the universal adhesive alongside PDT with methylene blue and indocyanine green. Employing two photosensitizers in PDT during the self-etch mode significantly increased the bond strength values.

Adhesive Bond Strength of Restorative Materials to Caries-Affected Dentin Treated with Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the adhesive bond strength of restorative materials to caries-affected dentin (CAD) treated with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) in comparison with conventional chemical disinfectants. Methods: Three databases, including the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, were searched to address the focused question: "What is the effect of aPDT compared to conventional chemical disinfection techniques on the adhesive bond strength of restorative materials to CAD?." Search keywords included "dentin*" "adhes bond*" "caries-affected dentin" "photodynamic "photochemotherapy" "photosensitizing agent" "phototherapy" "photoradiation" "laser" "light activated" "photoactivated." A fixed-effects model was used in each meta-analysis and the inverse variance was used to calculate the standard mean difference (SMD). For evaluating the statistical heterogeneity, the Cochrane's Q test and the I2 statistics were used. The risk of bias was evaluated based on the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the qualitative as well as quantitative analysis. The results of the meta-analyses exhibited an SMD of 2.38% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.03-2.73; p < 0.00001], indicating a statistically significant difference in the shear bond strength scores between the tested group (samples treated with aPDT) and the control group (i.e., favoring the sound dentin and/or conventional chemical disinfectants). Contrarily, an SMD of -1.46% (95% CI: -2.04 to -0.88; p < 0.00001) and -0.37% (95% CI: -0.70 to -0.03; p = 0.03) was observed, indicating a statistically significant difference in the microtensile bond strength (μTBS), as well as microleakage scores between the tested group (favoring the samples treated with aPDT) and the control group (i.e., sound dentin and/or conventional chemical disinfectants). Conclusions: Adhesive bond strength of restorative materials to CAD treated with conventional chemical disinfectants showed superior outcomes compared to photodynamic therapy (aPDT).

Clinical applications of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy in dentistry

Given the emergence of resistant bacterial strains and novel microorganisms that globally threaten human life, moving toward new treatment modalities for microbial infections has become a priority more than ever. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) has been introduced as a promising and non-invasive local and adjuvant treatment in several oral infectious diseases. Its efficacy for elimination of bacterial, fungal, and viral infections and key pathogens such as Streptococcus mutans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Candida albicans, and Enterococcus faecalis have been investigated by many invitro and clinical studies. Researchers have also investigated methods of increasing the efficacy of such treatment modalities by amazing developments in the production of natural, nano based, and targeted photosensitizers. As clinical studies have an important role in paving the way towards evidence-based applications in oral infection treatment by this method, the current review aimed to provide an overall view of potential clinical applications in this field and summarize the data of available randomized controlled clinical studies conducted on the applications of aPDT in dentistry and investigate its future horizons in the dental practice. Four databases including PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, Scopus and Embase were searched up to September 2022 to retrieve related clinical studies. There are several clinical studies reporting aPDT as an effective adjunctive treatment modality capable of reducing pathogenic bacterial loads in periodontal and peri-implant, and persistent endodontic infections. Clinical evidence also reveals a therapeutic potential for aPDT in prevention and reduction of cariogenic organisms and treatment of infections with fungal or viral origins, however, the number of randomized clinical studies in these groups are much less. Altogether, various photosensitizers have been used and it is still not possible to recommend specific irradiation parameters due to heterogenicity among studies. Reaching effective clinical protocols and parameters of this treatment is difficult and requires further high quality randomized controlled trials focusing on specific PS and irradiation parameters that have shown to have clinical efficacy and are able to reduce pathogenic bacterial loads with sufficient follow-up periods.

Shear bond strength of resin modified glass ionomer cement following photodynamic therapy, Er,Cr:YSGG and chlorhexidine in hypoplastic primary teeth

PURPOSE

This study investigates the micro shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) bonded to hypoplastic teeth after the application of chlorhexidine (CHX), sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), Er;Cr:YSGG and methylene blue mediated antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (APDT).

METHODS

A total sample of 60 erupted and extracted hypoplastic teeth collected from < 16 years children were subjected to different conditioning protocols including control group that involved bonding of hypoplastic teeth with RMGIC; CHX and NaOCl groups that included hypoplastic enamel being treated with 0.2% CHX and 2% NaOCl solution for 30 s followed by rinsing and drying for 5 s, MB-PDT group involved methylene blue photosensitizer and Er,Cr:YSGG group. All specimens were processed for microshear bond strength in a universal tester. The fractured surface was examined using a stereomicroscope at 40 × magnification and categorized under adhesive, cohesive and mixed.

RESULTS

The highest microshear bond strength was noted for the control group (∼29 MPa). Whereas the specimens conditioned by NaOCl showed the lowest microshear bond strength (∼17 MPa). Among the treatment groups, APDT showed the highest bond strength values (∼22 MPa) as compared to chemical disinfection protocols. However, Er, Cr:YSGG showed slightly lower microshear bond strength as compared to APDT. No significant difference was noted between CHX and NaOCl groups (p > 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference when all the groups were compared together (p < 0.05). Microscopic analysis revealed that specimens bonded after APDT showed the highest adhesive failures (70%). The highest cohesive failures were seen in NaOCl group (40%). The mixed type of failures was seen in the control groups with none appearing for chemical disinfection protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that APDT could be a potential therapeutic strategy for increasing the microshear bond strength of RMGIC to hypoplastic enamel.