Influence of two methods of smear layer removal on the surface properties of dentin.
- Author:
Lingli ZHU
1
;
Lin TANG
1
;
Bowen LI
2
;
Mei WANG
1
;
Yuhua LIU
1
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China.
2. Department of Stomatology, Beijing Hospital; National Center of Gerontology; Institute of Geriatric Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Dentin;
Etching;
Smear layer;
Ultrasonics
- MeSH:
Dentin/ultrastructure*;
Humans;
Surface Properties;
Smear Layer;
Molar, Third;
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning;
Dental Etching/methods*
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2025;57(2):340-346
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the effects of two methods of smear layer removal on the surface properties of dentin.
METHODS:Sixty extracted sound third molars were collected in this study, and were prepared as uniform dentin specimens with smear layer. All specimens were randomly divided into three groups: Control group, ultrasonic treatment (UT) group and etched treatment (ET) group. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) were used to observe the surface micromorphology of all three groups. Then, the surface elements, mineral phases and functional groups were analyzed by energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and flourier transformed infrared spectrometer (FTIR) respectively. The mechanical properties, hydrophilicity and biocompatibility were also further evaluated.
RESULTS:It was revealed that dentin tubules of UT and ET groups were exposed, but lots of dentin debris piled up on the surface of the control one which covered up dentin tubules on the surface. The EDX results should that the weaker peak value of calcium and phosphorus in ET group than control and UT groups. Characteristic peaks of hydroxyapatite could be seen by XRD in all of the three groups, but lower distinctive peaks of amide Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ bands of collagen of the dentin surface in control group than in ET and UT groups. The microhardness results showed that ET group was lower than control and UT groups, the difference was significant (P < 0.05). Better hydrophilicity of ET group was investigated (P < 0.05) than control group and UT group. Cells could be observed to adhere normally to dentin surface of each group which meant that all of the three groups had good biocompatibility.
CONCLUSION:Both UT and ET could effectively remove the smear layer on the surface of dentin and had no adverse effect of the dentin micromorphology and biocompatibility. The ultrasonic removal of the smear layer did not influence the mineral structure, hydrophilicity and mechanical properties of dentin surface. Although ET can effectively improve the hydrophilicity of dentin but decreased mechanical properties and the content of calcium and phosphorus.
