Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-7g5wt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T23:56:00.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shear bond strength analysis and marginal gap evaluation of restoration–tooth interface of aesthetic restorations after simulated Co-60 gamma irradiation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2021

Aseem P. Tikku ,
Madan L. B. Bhatt ,
Narendra K. Painuly ,
Ramesh Bharti Open the ORCID record for Ramesh Bharti [Opens in a new window] ,
Rhythm Bains  and
Sakshma Misra
Aseem P. Tikku
Affiliation:
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
Madan L. B. Bhatt
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
Narendra K. Painuly
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
Ramesh Bharti*
Affiliation:
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
Rhythm Bains
Affiliation:
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
Sakshma Misra
Affiliation:
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
*
Author for correspondence: Dr Ramesh Bharti, Additional Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, 226003, India. Tel: +91-9935724723. E-mail: rameshbharti@kgmcindia.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Radiotherapy to the head and neck region may cause considerable radiotherapy-induced changes in the surrounding tissues. These changes are oral mucositis, hyposalivation, dental caries, osteoradionecrosis, trismus and overall impact on patients’ quality of life. Tooth-coloured synthetic materials, unlike metallic restoration, did not influence radiation dose distribution. However, their exposure to a gamma radiation therapeutic dose during treatment might cause structural and compositional changes that alter their mechanical and physical properties.

Aim:

This study intends to evaluate the effect of Co 60 gamma rays on shear bond strength and marginal adaptation of already restored tooth surfaces, to help in material selection before the onset of radiotherapy.

Materials and methods:

Hundred freshly extracted human permanent mandibular molar teeth collected and stored in a 0·2% thymol solution for disinfection and were randomly divided into two groups of 50 each, to be tested for the shear bond strength of restoration to dentin and the marginal gap at tooth–restoration interface, respectively.

Results:

ANOVA showed a significant effect of both radiotherapy (F = 40·33, p < 0·001) and restorations (134·00, p < 0·001) on the marginal gap at the interface. In the without radiotherapy group, the mean marginal gap was least in Group Z250, and in with radiation, Bulk Fill has the least mean marginal gap. The mean shear bond strength was comparatively higher for all restorations without radiation than with radiation (p < 0·001).

Findings:

Gamma radiation affects the physical or mechanical properties of tooth structure and the tooth restorative interface. Composites seem to be good restorative material when placed before the onset of radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients.

Keywords

composite resinsmarginal adaptationradiotherapyshear bond strength
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 22 , 2023 , e13
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ferlay, J, Steliarova-Foucher, E, Lortet-Tieulent, J, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: 1374–1403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferlay, J, Soerjomataram, I, Dikshit, R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015; 136: E359–E386.Google ScholarPubMed
Baskar, R, Dai, J, Wenlong, N, Yeo, R, Yeoh, K W. Biological response of cancer cells to radiation treatment. Front Mol Biosci 2014; 1: 24.Google ScholarPubMed
Kawashita, Y, Soutome, S, Umeda, M, Saito, T. Oral management strategies for radiotherapy of head and neck cancer. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 2020; 56: 62–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beech, N, Robinson, S, Porceddu, S, Batstone, M. Dental management of patients irradiated for head and neck cancer. Aust Dent J 2014; 59: 20–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, H, Kumar, N. Dental management of a patient with head and neck cancer: a case report. Br Dent J 2019; 227: 25–29.Google ScholarPubMed
Murdoch-Kinch, CA, Zwetchkenbaum, S. Dental management of the head and neck cancer patient treated with radiation therapy. J Mich Dent Assoc 2011; 93: 28–37.Google ScholarPubMed
Naves, LZ, Novais, VR, Armstrong, SR, Correr-Sobrinho, L, Soares, C J. Effect of gamma radiation on bonding to human enamel and dentin. Support Care Cancer 2012; 20: 2873–2878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biscaro, SL, Moraes, RR, Correr, AB, Almeida, SM, Bóscolo, FN, Soares, CJ, Correr-Sobrinho, L Effect of X-ray radiation dose on the bond different adhesive systems to Dentin. J Adhes Dent 2009 11:355–360.Google Scholar
Bodrumlu, EH, Bodrumlu, E, Avşar, A, Meydan, A D. Effect of radiotherapy on the sealing ability of temporary filling materials. Eur J Gen Dent 2015; 4:8–11.Google Scholar
Soares, CJ, Faria-e-Silva, AL, Rodrigues, M P, et al. Polymerization shrinkage stress of composite resins and resin cement—what do we need to know? Braz Oral Res 2017; 31: e62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menezes-Silva, R, Cabral, R N, Pascotto, R C, et al. Mechanical and optical properties of conventional restorative glass-ionomer cement—a systematic review. J Appl Oral Sci 2019; 27: e2018357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khoroushi, M, Keshani, F. A review of glass-ionomers: from conventional glass-ionomer to bioactive glass-ionomer. Dent Res J 2013; 10: 411–420.Google ScholarPubMed
Carvalho, T-S, van Amerongen, W-E, de Gee, A, Bönecker, M, Sampaio, F-C. Shear bond strengths of three glass ionomer cement to enamel and dentine. Medi Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011; 16: e406–e410.Google ScholarPubMed
de Miranda, RR, Silva, ACA, Dantas, NO, Soares, CJ, Novais, V R. Chemical analysis of in vivo-irradiated dentine of head and neck cancer patients by ATR-FTIR and Raman spectroscopy. Clin Oral Investig 2019; 23 (8): 3351–3358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, C L. Advances in glass-ionomer cements. J Appl Oral Sci 2006; 14 Suppl (1): 3–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Andrade, A M, Moura, S K, Reis, A, Loguercio, A D, Garcia, E J, Grande, R H M. Evaluating resin-enamel bonds by micro shear and micro tensile bond strength tests: effects of composite resin. J Appl Oral Sci 2010; 18:591–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Siqueira Mellara, T, Palma-Dibb, R G, de Oliveira, H F, et al. The effect of radiation therapy on the mechanical and morphological properties of the enamel and dentin of deciduous teeth- an in vitro study. Radiat Oncol 2014; 22: 9–30.Google Scholar
Geoffroy, M, Tochon-Danguy, H J. Long-lived radicals in irradiated apatites of biological interest: an ESR study of apatite samples treated with CO2. Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med 1985; 48: 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gogineni, V R, Kargiotis, O, Klopfenstein, J D, Gujrati, M, Dinh, D H, Rao, J S. RNA i-mediated down regulation of radiation induced MMP-9 leads to apoptosis via activation of ERK and Akt in IOMM-Lee cells. Int J Oncol 2009; 34: 209–218.Google Scholar
Grotz, K A, Duschner, H, Kutzner, J, Thelen, M, Wagner, W. Histotomography studies of direct radiogenic dental enamel changes. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir 1998; 2: 85–90.Google ScholarPubMed
Harhash, A. The effect of radiotherapy dose on the bond strength of resin composite to both enamel and dentin. Egypt Dent J 2013; 59: 3995–4002.Google Scholar
Hersek, N, Canay, Ş, Akça, K, Çiftçi, Y. Comparison of microleakage properties of three different filling materials. An autoradiographic study. J Oral Rehabil 2002; 29: 1212–1217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korkmaz, Y, Gurgan, S, Firat, E, Nathanson, D. Shear bond strength of three different nano-restorative materials to dentin. Oper Dent 2010; 35: 50–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegde, Mithra N, Hegde, Nidarsh D, Suchetha Kumari, N, Ganesh Sanjeev, P. Radiation effect on the structure and mechanical properties of teeth- an in vitro study. Eur J Pharm Med Res 2015; 2: 788–800.Google Scholar
Cruz, A D, Sinhoreti, M A, Ambrosano, G M, Rastelli, A N, Bagnato, V S, Boscolo, F N. Effect of therapeutic dose X rays on mechanical and chemical properties of esthetic dental materials. J Mater Res 2008; 11: 313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Araya, J, Maruyama, M, Sassa, K et al. Ionizing radiation enhances matrix metalloproteinase-2 production in human lung epithelial cells. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2001; 280: L30–L38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Satoyoshi, M, Kawata, A, Koizumi, T, Inoue, K, Itohara, S, Teranaka, T, Mikuni-Takagaki, Y. Matrix metalloproteinase-2 in dentin matrix mineralization. J Endod 2001; 27: 462–466.Google ScholarPubMed
Yesilyurt, C, Bulucu, B, Sezen, O, Bulut, G, Celik, D. Bond strengths of two conventional glass-ionomer cements to irradiated and non-irradiated dentin. Dent Mater J 2008; 27: 695–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed