Er:YAG Laser in QSP Modality for Treatment of Indirect Adhesive Restoration Build-Up: Surface Roughness Analysis and Morphology Assessment by Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (ESEM).
Ilaria Giovannacci, Monica Mattarozzi, Fabrizio Moroni, Giuseppe Pedrazzi, Paolo Vescovi, Maria Careri
{"title":"Er:YAG Laser in QSP Modality for Treatment of Indirect Adhesive Restoration Build-Up: Surface Roughness Analysis and Morphology Assessment by Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (ESEM).","authors":"Ilaria Giovannacci, Monica Mattarozzi, Fabrizio Moroni, Giuseppe Pedrazzi, Paolo Vescovi, Maria Careri","doi":"10.3390/dj13050223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Sandblasting build-ups before applying the acid and adhesive significantly improves the bond strength. The aim of this study is to evaluate, for the first time, the effectiveness of an Er:YAG laser used in QSP mode to treat the surface of build-ups before the adhesive cementation sequence. <b>Methods:</b> This ex vivo study was conducted on 12 intact, undecayed extracted teeth kept hydrated in NaCl 0.9% solution. A cavity was created in the center and reconstructed with composite resin (build-up). Then, samples were prepared with burs and divided into three groups: control group G1, prepared only with burs; group G2, in which surfaces were treated with a sandblaster (2.5 bar, 10 mm from composite surface, aluminum oxide, 10 s); and group G3, treated using an Er:YAG laser (QSP modality, 1 W, 10 Hz, 100 mJ). The surface roughness of the build-ups was measured using a CCI MP-L digital optical profiler (Taylor Hobson, Leicester, UK), and surface morphology was studied using the Quanta™ 250 FEG (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) ESEM instrument. <b>Results:</b> Regarding enamel, mean surface roughness in G1 vs. G2 was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.968); meanwhile, differences between the Er:YAG laser group (G3) and G1 or G2 were significant (G3 vs. G1 <i>p</i> < 0.001; G3 vs. G2 <i>p</i> < 0.001). Regarding dentin, G1 vs. G2 was significant (<i>p</i> = 0.021); differences between G3 and G1 or G2 were extremely significant (G3 vs. G1 <i>p</i> < 0.001; G3 vs. G2 <i>p</i> < 0.001). The same trend was detected for resin. <b>Conclusions:</b> An Er:YAG laser in QSP mode used on the build-up surface for indirect adhesive restorations is innovative and should be investigated with further studies. However, it seems extremely effective with increased roughness, the absence of a smear layer and characteristics potentially favorable for good adhesion for all substrates (enamel, dentin, resin).</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":"13 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13050223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Sandblasting build-ups before applying the acid and adhesive significantly improves the bond strength. The aim of this study is to evaluate, for the first time, the effectiveness of an Er:YAG laser used in QSP mode to treat the surface of build-ups before the adhesive cementation sequence. Methods: This ex vivo study was conducted on 12 intact, undecayed extracted teeth kept hydrated in NaCl 0.9% solution. A cavity was created in the center and reconstructed with composite resin (build-up). Then, samples were prepared with burs and divided into three groups: control group G1, prepared only with burs; group G2, in which surfaces were treated with a sandblaster (2.5 bar, 10 mm from composite surface, aluminum oxide, 10 s); and group G3, treated using an Er:YAG laser (QSP modality, 1 W, 10 Hz, 100 mJ). The surface roughness of the build-ups was measured using a CCI MP-L digital optical profiler (Taylor Hobson, Leicester, UK), and surface morphology was studied using the Quanta™ 250 FEG (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) ESEM instrument. Results: Regarding enamel, mean surface roughness in G1 vs. G2 was not statistically significant (p = 0.968); meanwhile, differences between the Er:YAG laser group (G3) and G1 or G2 were significant (G3 vs. G1 p < 0.001; G3 vs. G2 p < 0.001). Regarding dentin, G1 vs. G2 was significant (p = 0.021); differences between G3 and G1 or G2 were extremely significant (G3 vs. G1 p < 0.001; G3 vs. G2 p < 0.001). The same trend was detected for resin. Conclusions: An Er:YAG laser in QSP mode used on the build-up surface for indirect adhesive restorations is innovative and should be investigated with further studies. However, it seems extremely effective with increased roughness, the absence of a smear layer and characteristics potentially favorable for good adhesion for all substrates (enamel, dentin, resin).
背景/目的:在使用酸和粘合剂之前的喷砂堆积可以显著提高粘合强度。本研究的目的是首次评估在胶结顺序之前,在QSP模式下使用Er:YAG激光处理堆积表面的有效性。方法:将12颗完整未蛀的拔牙在0.9% NaCl溶液中保持水化,进行离体研究。在中心创建一个腔体,并用复合树脂(构建)重建。然后用毛刺制备样品,分为3组:对照组G1,仅用毛刺制备;G2组,表面喷砂处理(2.5 bar,距离复合材料表面10 mm,氧化铝,10 s);G3组,Er:YAG激光(QSP模式,1 W, 10 Hz, 100 mJ)治疗。使用CCI MP-L数字光学剖面仪(Taylor Hobson, Leicester, UK)测量堆积物的表面粗糙度,使用Quanta™250 FEG (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) ESEM仪器研究表面形貌。结果:在牙釉质方面,G1组与G2组的平均表面粗糙度差异无统计学意义(p = 0.968);同时,Er:YAG激光组(G3)与G1、G2组比较差异有统计学意义(G3 vs G1 p < 0.001;G3 vs. G2 p < 0.001)。牙本质方面,G1 vs. G2差异有统计学意义(p = 0.021);G3与G1或G2的差异极显著(G3 vs. G1 p < 0.001;G3 vs. G2 p < 0.001)。树脂也有同样的趋势。结论:QSP模式下的Er:YAG激光用于修复面间接粘接修复是一种创新,值得进一步研究。然而,随着粗糙度的增加,没有涂抹层和对所有基质(牙釉质,牙本质,树脂)具有良好附着力的潜在优势,它似乎非常有效。