Purpose: To evaluate the ultramorphology of SuperSeal (SS), a desensitizing agent, as a liner beneath 4 restorative procedures using FE-SEM & TEM. Materials and methods: 1 mm thick occlusal dentin disks were obtained from 8 human molars. Occlusal sides were polished to remove the smear layer, mimicking exposed dentin of non-carious lesions. Treatments were applied to the occlusal surfaces of dentin under hydraulic pressure and according to the manufacturers' instructions. Materials applied after SS were: (1) Fuji Cavity Conditioner + Fuji II LC (CC + FLC), (2) Fuji II LC without conditioner (FLC), (3) Optibond FL 3 step adhesive + Clearfil Protect Liner IV (OP-FL + CPL), and (4) Clearfil SE-bond + Clearfil Protect Liner IV (SE + CPL). Samples were prepared according to conventional methods of electron microscopy and evaluated with a FE-SEM and TEM. Results: The dentin surface in the CC +FLC and OP-FL + CPL groups displayed demineralization consistent with conditioned/etched dentin and SS crystals were not apparent. SS crystals were observed in the interface of FLC and SE + CPL groups. Atypical resin infiltration into the tubules was observed for OP-FL + CPL. The SE + CPL group did exhibit tubular invaginations consistent with the presence of SS crystals. Conclusion: In the groups where dentin was etched or conditioned, SS crystals were not observed. During this study the permeability (hydraulic conductance) of dentin increased when the dentin was etched or conditioned. If it is necessary to etch or condition the dentin during the restorative procedure, the use of SS may not be beneficial in reducing dentin sensitivity. Further studies should evaluate the bond for the systems that did not use conditioning or etching and should evaluate the adhesive abilities of GIC to dentin after SS placement. Supported by NIDCR/NIH T35 DE07159-18.

Back to the Dental Materials: II - Adhesion-Other Program
Back to the 32nd Annual Meeting and Exhibition of the AADR (March 12-15, 2003)

Top Level Search