The International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) is a clinical scoring system which allows detection and assessment of caries activity. ICDAS was developed for use in clinical research, clinical practice and for epidemiological purposes. A recent review of caries detection criteria systems found that there were inconsistencies among the research criteria for caries measuring systems. There is a need to an uniform system which allows comparison of data collected in different researches. ICDAS allows detection of caries process at every stage and characterization of the caries activity status of lesion. Later, the criteria were modified and ICDAS II created. The aim of this review is to inform about the ICDAS II and make a comparison between ICDAS II criteria and other caries detection systems.

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a surface sealant on the surface roughness of different composites and compare their microhardness values. Materials and MethodsSixty disc-shaped specimens were prepared and assigned to 6 groups (n =10). Groups were prepared as follows; Group 1 (Herculite XRV Ultra), Group 2 (Beautifil Bulk Restorative) and Group 3 (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative). Groups 4, 5, and 6 were prepared by applying a surface sealant (BisCover LV) on the specimens in groups 1, 2 and 3. Surface hardness of the discs in group 1, 2, and 3 and surface roughness of the discs in all groups were measured using the Vickers hardness test and a profilometer, respectively. One-way ANOVA was used to test for differences among the groups. ResultsNo significant differences were observed in the microhardness and roughness between the experimental and control groups for each restorative materials. Group 3 showed the highest surface hardness and group 4 showed the lowest surface roughness values. ConclusionUsing the BisCover LV resin after the polishing step has no significant effect on the surface roughness. The highest hardness values were obtained for the Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative after the polishing step. The smoothest surfaces were obtained for all experimental groups using the BisCover LV resin after the polishing step, Herculite XRV Ultra showed lower average roughness values than the other materials.

No abstract

Tooth bleaching is the most applied treatment for improving the aesthetical appearance of discoloured teeth, which can be done at-home bleaching or dentist-supervised in-office bleaching. 1 The major tooth bleaching treatments can be done by the application of hydrogen peroxide (HP). There are many precursors of hydrogen peroxide such as carbamide peroxide, sodium perborate available in different concentrations. Tooth bleaching has several side effects like hypersensitivity, gingival irritation and allergic reaction. 2 High concentrations of HP used due to faster whitening can involve tooth sensitivity. 3 Although the mechanism of hypersensitivity occurred after bleaching treatment is not clear, it is explained by hydrodynamic theory. 4 Markowitz 5 explain the hypersensitivity occurred after tooth bleaching mechanism with the peroxide penetrates the tooth structure and directly activates a neuronal receptor and not because of hydrodynamic effects. Also, bleaching agents make enamel surface

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the compressive strength, flexural strength and flexural modulus of high-viscosity, low-viscosity bulk-fill, and conventional nano-hybrid resin composite materials alone and when covered with nano-hybrid resin composite at different incremental thicknesses on the bulk-fill composites. Materials and Methods: Specimens (N=60) were fabricated from the following materials or their combinations (n=10 per group): a) conventional nano-hybrid composite Z550 (FK), b) high-viscosity bulk-fill composite (Tetric N Ceram-TBF), c) low-viscosity bulk-fill composite SDR (SDR), d) Sonicfill (SF), e) SDR (2 mm)+FK (2 mm), f) SDR (4 mm)+FK (4 mm). After 24 h water storage, compressive strength was measured in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Additional specimens (N=40) (25x2x2 mm3) were made from FK, TBF, SDR and SF in order to determine the flexural strength and the flexural modulus, (n=10) and subjected to three-point bending test (0.5 mm/min). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tamhane’s T2 post-hoc tests (p<0.05). Results: The mean compressive strength (MPa) of the nano-hybrid composite (FK) was significantly higher (223.8±41.3) than those of the other groups (123±27 - 170±24) (p<0.001). SDR (4 mm)+FK (2 mm) showed significantly higher compressive strength than when covered with 4 mm (143±30) or when used alone (146±11) (p<0.05). The mean flexural strength (159±31) and the flexural modulus of FK (34±7) was significantly higher than that of the high- or low-viscosity bulk-fill composites (p<0.001). The mean flexural strength of SF (132±20) was significantly higher compared to TBF (95±25) (p<0.05). Conclusion: Bulk-fill resin composites demonstrated poorer mechanical properties compared to nano-hybrid composite but similar to that of SF. Increasing the thickness of low-viscosity bulk-fill composite (SDR) from 2 to 4 mm underneath the nano-hybrid composite (FK) can improve the mechanical properties of the bulk-fill composites. KeywordsBulk-fill composites; Compressive strength; Flexural modulus; Flexural strength; Mechanical properties.