SUMMARY
This study aimed to objectively evaluate the radiopacity of different dental composites and their subjective influence on diagnosing secondary caries–like lesions and how these results correlate. For objective analysis, three resin specimens (1 mm thick, with a 4-mm internal diameter) were made with four composites: 1) Charisma; 2) Filtek Z250; 3) Prisma AP.H; and 4) Glacier. Three human teeth were selected and then mesio-distally sectioned (1 mm thick) to make the dental specimens. An aluminum (Al) wedge (12 steps, 1 mm thick, 99.8% purity) was used as an internal standard to calculate the radiopacity. For subjective analysis, 20 human teeth were selected and then prepared with a mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) inlay cavity, with half the teeth receiving a round cavity to simulate the carious lesion. The MOD was restored using the composites at four different times. Standardized radiographs were acquired and then digitized (300 dpi and eight-bit TIFF) for both analyses. A histogram objectively measured the pixel intensity values of the images, which were converted into millimeters of Al using linear regressions. Eight observers subjectively evaluated the images using a five-point rating scale to diagnose the caries. The data were statistically analyzed using the Student t-test, the Kappa test, diagnostic testing, and the Pearson correlation coefficient (α=0.05). All materials showed radiopacity values compatible with dental tissues (p>0.05); Glacier was similar to dentin and Prisma AP.H was similar to enamel, while the remaining materials showed a middle radiopacity. Prisma AP.H and Glacier differed (p<0.05) in relation to their accuracy to caries diagnosis, with Glacier having greater accuracy. There was a correlation between objective and subjective analyses with negative linear dependence. An increase in the material's radiopacity could have a subjectively negative influence on the diagnosis of secondary caries; thus, an ideal radiopacity for a dental composite is closer to the dentin image and produces similar attenuation to X-rays than does dentin.