Effect of Radiotherapy on the Adhesive Interface of Caries-affected Dentin and Bioactive Restorations: A Micro-CT Analysis
This study aimed to analyze the presence of defects within the adhesive interface formed with five bioactive dental materials and caries-affected dentin concerning the timing of radiotherapy (before or after the restorative procedures) by micro-CT. A total of 96 carious human molars were randomly allocated into the following groups based on the timing of the radiotherapy sequence: radiotherapy followed by restoration (RT1) or restoration followed by radiotherapy (RT2). Then, six subgroups were established within these groups based on the type of materials used (n=8). Following cavity preparation and caries removal, a universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond) was administered in self-etch mode or accompanied by applying suitable cavity conditioners according to the manufacturers’ guidelines. Subsequently, restorations were performed using five bioactive restorative materials (resin-modified glass-ionomer [Fuji II LC], high-viscosity glass-ionomer hybrid [EQUIA Forte HT], giomer [Beautifil II], alkasite [Cention N], and dual-cure bulk-fill composite [Activa Bioactive Restorative]) and a conventional microhybrid resin composite (Filtek Z250). The radiotherapy regimen encompassed 60 Grays (Gy) administered at a rate of 2 Gy/day over 6 weeks, 5 days a week. Micro-CT analysis was employed to assess adhesive defects at the interface between caries-affected dentin and the restorations. The data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and Dunn tests (α=0.05). RT2 caused significantly higher adhesive defects than RT1 for the Filtek Z250 and Activa Bioactive Restorative subgroups (p<0.05). For RT1, no significant differences were found in adhesive defects among all tested subgroups (p>0.05). By contrast, for RT2, adhesive defects were significantly higher for the Activa Bioactive Restorative and Cention N subgroups than for the EQUIA Forte HT and Beautifil II subgroups (p<0.05). When using most bioactive restorative materials, the timing of radiotherapy had no significant influence on the adhesive interface. Regarding restoration following a radiotherapy protocol, a favorable impact was identified with high-viscosity glass ionomer hybrid cement and giomer bioactive restorations compared with dual-cure bioactive bulk-fill composite and alkasite restorations.SUMMARY
Purpose:
Methods and Materials:
Results:
Conclusions:
A schematic illustration of all groups, subgroups, and study design.
A representative image illustrating the caries-affected dentin detection and analysis.
Representative images of the specimens’ analysis from buccal to lingual and mesial to distal directions using micro-CT. A software version 2.3.2.0., of the volume of black spaces (adhesive defects).
Representative two-dimensional (2D) micro-CT images of all tested groups on sagittal section. The adhesive defects are detected between teeth and restorations (red arrows). (A) Fuji II; (B) Equia Forte HT; (C) Beautifil 2; (D) Cention N; (E) Activa Bioactive Restorative; and (F) Filtek Z250. RT1, radiotherapy first; RT2, restoration first.
Contributor Notes