Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the behavior of experimental dental adhesiveswith hydroxyapatite (HAp), alpha-tricalcium phosphate (α-TCP)or octacalcium phosphate (OCP) after storing them in threedifferent media: dry storage, distilled water, or lactic acid.Methods: An experimental adhesive resin was formulated withbisphenol A glycol dimethacrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate,and photoiniciator/co-initiator system. HAp (GHAp), α-TCP(Gα-TCP), or OCP (GOCP) were added to the adhesive resin at 2wt.%, and one group remained without calcium phosphates tobe used as a control (GCtrl). The adhesives were evaluated forsurface roughness, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), andultimate tensile strength (UTS) after storing in distilled water(pH=5.8), lactic acid (pH=4) or dry medium. Results: The initialsurface roughness was not different among groups (p>0.05).GHAp showed increased values after immersion in water(p<0.05) or lactic acid (p<0.05). SEM analysis showed a surfacevariation of the filled adhesives, mainly for Gα-TCP and GHAp. GHApshowed the highest UTS in dry medium (p<0.05), and its valuedecreased after lactic acid storage (p<0.05). Conclusions:The findings of this study showed that HAp, OCP, and α-TCPaffected the physical behavior of the experimental adhesiveresins in different ways. HAp was the calcium phosphatethat most adversely affected the surface roughness and themechanical property of the material, mainly when exposed toan acid medium.
Highlights
Recurrent caries at the tooth-restoration interface is one of the major causes of restoration replacement over time[1]
While there was no difference among groups for Ra1 (p>0.05), the roughness of Gα-TCP and GHAp increased after immersion in lactic acid (p0.05)
When comparing ΔRa after immersion in lactic acid, GHAp showed the highest variation among groups, with statistical difference in comparison to GCtrl (p
Summary
Recurrent caries at the tooth-restoration interface is one of the major causes of restoration replacement over time[1]. This outcome is related to materials’ hydrolytic and enzymatic degradation when in contact with the oral environment, leading to higher surface roughness, biofilm accumulation at the margin, and caries development[2]. Restorative materials may not completely seal the tooth interface. The sealing ability still is a concern since gaps are prone to caries development[3]. Restorative resin-based materials have been modified to decrease polymerization shrinkage, hydrolysis degradation, and to decrease gaps formation at the interface via a biomimetic remineralization approach[4]. Previous studies evaluated CaP as fillers in experimental adhesive resins showing promising results such as increased bond strength[11,12] and mineral deposition at the tooth[6,8,11]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
