Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Micromorphology and adhesive performance of Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of primary teeth
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Micromorphology and adhesive performance of Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of primary teeth
Do you wish to request the book?
Micromorphology and adhesive performance of Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of primary teeth
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Micromorphology and adhesive performance of Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of primary teeth
2012
Overview
This study evaluated (1) the micromorphology by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and (2) the adhesive performance by microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of diamond bur-treated dentin compared to Er:YAG laser-treated dentin of human primary teeth. (1) For qualitative SEM evaluation, dentin of 18 second primary molars (
n
= 3/method) was treated with either diamond bur as a control (group 1a: 40 μm diamond bur only (clinical situation); group 1b: grinding + 40 μm diamond bur) or with Er:YAG laser (group 2a (clinical situation, manufacturer’s settings): 200 mJ/25 Hz (5 W) + 100 mJ/35 Hz (3.5 W) laser only; group 2b (experimental setting \"high\"): grinding + 400 mJ/20 Hz (8 W); group 2c (manufacturer’s setting \"finishing\"): grinding + 100 mJ/35 Hz (3.5 W); group 2d (experimental setting \"low\"): grinding + 50 mJ/35 Hz (1.75 W)). (2) For evaluation of adhesive performance, 64 second primary molars were divided into four groups and treated as described for group 1b and groups 2b/c/d (
n
= 16/method), and μTBS of Clearfil SE/Clearfil Majesty Esthetic to dentin was measured. The SEM micrographs were qualitatively analyzed. The μTBS values were compared with a Kruskal–Wallis test. The significance level was set at α = 0.05. SEM micrographs showed the typical micromorphologies with a smear layer for the diamond bur groups and open dentin tubules for all laser-treated groups. However, in group 2d, the laser beam had insufficiently irradiated the dentin area, rendering the underlying ground surface partly visible. There were no statistically significant differences between μTBS values of the four groups (
p
= 0.394). This suggests that Er:YAG laser treatment of dentin of primary molars provides bond strengths similar to those obtained following diamond bur treatment.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag,Springer Nature B.V
