.PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY/CopyrishI © 1984 byThe American Academy of PedodonticslVol. 6 No. | SCIENTIFIC

Caries-like lesion formation aroundpreventive resin restorations

M. John Hicks, DDS, MS, PhD

AbstractSecondary caries-like lesion formation around

occlusal alloy and preventive resin restorations wasstudied using an artificial caries system and polarizedlight microscopy. Both alloy and resin restorationsprevented secondary lesion formation to a significantextent. However, the preventive resins experienced nolesion formation along the enamel-resin interface.Preventive resins could serve as an alternative toocc]usa] alloy restorations in certain clinicalsituations.

The dental profession long has recognized the pro-

blem of dealing with pit and fissure caries. During the1920s, two different clinical techniques were introducedto combat the problem of occlusal caries. Thaddeus Hyattadvocated the prophylactic odontotomy.1,2 This pro-cedure consisted of preparing a conservative Class I cavitythat included all pits and fissures and then placing an alloyrestoration. The rationale for this prophylactic restora-tion was that the procedure prevented future insult to thepulp from caries and required less time to restore thanwhen the tooth eventually succumbed to caries. Bbdeckerpresented a more conservative approach toward occlusalcaries prevention.3 The eradication of fissures was ad-vocated to transform deep, retentive areas into cleansableones. Essentially, these two clinical techniques wereemployed until the widespread use of sealants becameprevalent.

With the introduction of sealants, it became possibleto prevent caries in a sound occlusal surface to a signifi-cant extent. However, the dental profession still is con-fronted with the problem of the questionable occlusal sur-face. The question has been whether to seal or to restorethe surface. A clinical procedure for caries restoration andsimultaneous caries prevention using the acid-etch tech-nique, known as the preventive resin restoration, was in-troduced by Simonsen in 1978.4 This restoration offersan alternative to either sealing over a questionable oc-

occlusal alloy and

clusal surface or restoring that surface with an alloy. Thetechnique involves both widening of the pits and fissuresand removal of enamel which appears to be affected bycaries. This cavity, prepared in enamel, then may beetched and sealed with a resin material.

The purpose of this in vitro study was to comparecaries-like lesion formation around Class I occlusal alloyrestorations and Type A preventive resin restorations.The Type A preventive resin restoration involves minimalpreparation of the pits and fissures with either a No. 1Aor 1A round bur prior to sealant placement.5 The ar-tificial caries system6 employed in this study has beenused previously to investigate secondary caries forma-tion around Class V alloy and composite resinrestorations. 7-10

The histopathology of caries-like lesions associatedwith secondary caries has been described.7 The lesionsconsist of two parts, an outer surface lesion and a cavitywall lesion. The outer surface lesion has the characteristicfeatures of primary enamel caries. The wall lesion is posi-tioned adjacent to the enamel-restoration interface. It isthought that the wall lesion is formed by diffusion ofhydrogen ions from the artificial caries medium into themicrospace between the enamel and restoration. Thisresults in a caries-like attack on the enamel surface of thecavity wall. The caries-like lesion, once formed, pro-gresses perpendicular to the cavity wall. Therefore, theability of a restorative material to resist a secondarycaries-like attack may be quantified by measuring thedepth of the cavity wall lesion perpendicular to theenamel-restoration interface, then comparing this depthwith the outer surface lesion depth.

Methods and MaterialsThirty extracted molar and premolar teeth with oc-=

clusal enamel caries were selected for this in vitro study(Figure 1). The criteria for selection of the ~eeth were: (1)the fissures must be intact; (2) the fissures must "catch"

PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY: March 1984/Vol. 6 No. 1 17

OCCLUSAL CARIES

PREVENTIVE RESINRESTORATION

POLARIZED LIGHTMICROSCOPY

ALLOY RESTORATION

LESION FORMATION

Figure 1. Diagram of ex-perimental design.

the explorer; and (3) an opaque, chalky appearance alongthe fissures suggestive of clinical incipient occlusal cariesmust be present. The teeth were assigned randomly totwo separate groups according to the restorative treat-ment to be performed. The occlusal surfaces were restoredwith either an alloy,3 or an unfilled resin.b

With the occlusal alloy portion of the study, Class Icavity preparations extending into dentin were performedusing inverted cone burs (No. 33) in a high-speed hand-piece. Following a thorough rinsing and drying pro-cedure, two coats of a cavity varnish were applied to thecavity preparation. The occlusal preparations then wererestored with a spherical alloy.3 Subsequently, thespecimens were stored in a humid environment for 20weeks.

In the preventive resin portion of the study, Type Apreventive cavities were prepared in the occlusal surfacesof the 15 remaining specimens. The Type A preventivecavity involved minimal preparation of the pits andfissures with either a No. 1A or Vi round bur prior tosealant placement.5 With this study, No. Vi round bursin a high-speed handpiece were used to remove enamel

''Dispersalloy, Johnson & Johnson Co.; East Windsor, N.J. 08561.bDelton, Johnson & Johnson Co.; East Windsor, N.J. 08561.

caries and questionable enamel. This resulted in widenedand deepened fissures along the entire occlusal surface.The preparations were examined visually and tactilely tomake certain that the enamel caries had been removed.All preparations were maintained within enamel. At thistime, the occlusal surfaces were cleaned thoroughly witha fluoride-free prophylaxis paste using a slow-speed hand-piece. Following a water rinse and air drying, theprepared fissures and surrounding occlusal surfaces wereetched for 60 seconds with the etching solution providedby the manufacturer. The teeth were washed with waterfor 30 seconds and air-dried for 30 seconds. An unfilledresinb was placed into the etched preventive cavities (at-tention was given to confining the resin material only tothe prepared fissures). The specimens with preventiveresin restorations then were stored in a humid environ-ment for 20 weeks.

After removal from the storage medium, an acid-resistant varnish was applied to the teeth leaving a 1 mmrim of exposed sound enamel adjacent to the restorations.At this time the teeth with alloy and preventive resinrestorations were exposed to an acidified gelatin (pH 4.0).This artificial caries system produces lesions that are in-distinguishable from naturally occurring caries.6

After an appropriate exposure period (10-12 weeks),caries-like lesion formation had occurred adjacent to therestorations (Figure 2). A number of longitudinal sectionswere prepared from the specimens using a Silverstone-Taylor Hard Tissue Microtome0 (Figure 3). Ground sec-tions were prepared to a thickness of approximately 100jjm for polarized light study.

The prepared sections were examined by polarized lightmicroscopy while imbibed in water. Two zones of enamelcaries may be seen when a lesion is viewed in water, thenegatively birefringent surface zone and the positivelybirefringent body of the lesion. Ten sections from eachof the restored teeth were evaluated for evidence of secon-dary caries formation. If microleakage had occurred be-tween the cavity wall and the restoration, a cavity walllesion would be present. The depth of the lesion, asmeasured perpendicular to the cavity wall, determinesthe degree to which a restorative material can preventa secondary caries attack. The maximum depth of eachwall lesion was measured along a traverse perpendicularto the enamel cavity wall. For comparative purposes, the

'Scientific Fabrications; Littleton, Colo. 80123.

Figure 2a. The typical appearanceof an occlusal surface following ex-posure to the artificial cariesmedium. The caries-like lesion (C)surrounding the preventive resinrestoration (R) can be seen as anopaque white band. The remainingocclusal surface has been protectedwith an acid-resistant varnish (V).

18 CARIES-LIKE LESION FORMATION AROUND RESTORATIONS: Hicks

Figure 2b. The acid-resistant var-nish has been removed from thistooth prior to sectioning. The caries-like lesion (C) can be distinguishedeasily from the preventive resinrestoration (R) and sound enamel(E). The ability of the acid-resistantvarnish to protect the underlyingsound enamel is evident.

Figure 3. Longitudinalsections 100-125 ^m inthickness were preparedusing a Silverstone-TaylorHard Tissue Microtome.Ten sections from eachtooth were prepared forpolarized light study. Asmany as 19 sections wereavailable for study withsome specimens.

maximum depth of each outer surface lesion wasmeasured along a traverse from the enamel surface to theadvancing front of the lesion. Data were collected from150 sections for each restorative material. Student's t-testswere performed with a significance level of p<0.05.

ResultsOuter surface lesions were present for each section ex-

amined, regardless of the restorative material used. Themean depth for outer lesions from teeth restored with thealloy material was 180 pirn (Table 1). The mean outerlesion depth for occlusal surfaces restored with the resinmaterial was 205 jjm. These depths were comparable forboth restorative treatment procedures and were notsignificantly different. However, mean depths for outerlesions and cavity wall lesions were significantly differentfor both treatment groups. In addition, the difference bet-ween the mean depths for cavity wall lesions for teethrestored with either alloy or preventive resin was signifi-cant at p <0.05. The mean cavity wall depth for an occlu-sal cavity restored with the alloy material was 42 ^im.Each section examined for the alloy restoration treatmentgroup possessed a wall lesion. These wall lesions rangedfrom 18 ^im to 87 ^tm. In marked contrast, no cavity walllesions were observed for occlusal surfaces restored withpreventive resins. This is remarkable considering that theouter surface lesion depths were similar for both the alloyand preventive resin treatment groups.

Histopathologic Appearance of Secondary Caries-LikeLesions

The occlusal surfaces of the teeth restored with thealloy material possessed both outer surface and cavitywall lesions in each case (Figures 4 & 5). The outer sur-face lesions possessed surface zones approximately 25-30^/m in depth. The bodies of the lesion had relativelysmooth or flat advancing fronts. This indicated that theacidified gel was providing a constant diffusion gradientof hydrogen ions. However, the presence of the surfacezones provided evidence that the dynamic processassociated with enamel caries had occurred. The cavitywall lesions had a characteristic appearance. Typically,

the cavity wall lesions were elongated in shape with theportion of the lesion situated toward the dentinoenameljunction tapering down to a pseudoisotropic band ofdemineralized enamel measuring approximately 10/^m indepth. The most superficial portion of the wall lesion wasusually 40-50 jum in depth when measured perpendicularto the prepared cavity wall. This area represented thegreatest depth of enamel affected by the secondary cariesattack. In the majority of specimens, the wall lesions ex-tended along the cavity walls to lengths of 550-750 ^mfrom the enamel surface toward the dentinoenamel junc-tion. Surface zones for the cavity wall lesions appearedeither negatively birefringent or pseudoisotropic. The sur-face zones in the portions of the lesions that were affectedto a greater depth (< 30 fjim) were, most often,pseudoisotropic. Negatively birefringent surface zoneswere found when the wall lesion depth was < 30 ^tin.Of particular interest was the fact that the alloy restora-tions did not survive the section preparation procedurevery well. Large fragments of the alloy restorations werelost from the surfaces of the restorations with smallerfragments lost adjacent to the cavosurfaces. Total lossof the restoration occurred during sectioning and grind-ing of the sections with approximately 30 per cent of thespecimens.

Table 1. Secondary Caries-Like Lesion Formation Around Alloyand Preventive Resin Restorations

RestorationType

Alloy

PreventiveResin

No. of No. ofTeeth Sections

Examined

15 150

15 150

WallLesion Depth

(X + S.D.)

42 ± 10 pirn3'6

0 ± 0 ^ma'c

OuterLesion Depth

(X±S.D.)

180 ± 38 jumb

205 ± 45 pjmc

Student's t-test — Significant Differences at p<0.05: (a) betweenwall lesion depths for alloy and preventive resin restorations,(b) between wall lesion and outer lesion depths for alloy restora-tions, and (c) between wall lesion and outer lesion depths forpreventive resin restorations.

PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY: March 1984/Vol. 6 No. 1 19

Figure 4. Secondary caries-like lesionformation has involved both the outer sur-face and cavity wall of this specimenrestored with an alloy (A). The outer sur-face lesion (O) is composed of a neg-atively birefringent surface zone andpositively birefringent body of the lesion.The depth of the outer lesion is 170 jjm.The cavity wall lesion (W) can be seenrunning parallel to the adjacent alloyrestoration. The wall lesion extends 40/^m into the enamel at its greatest depth.The lesion tapers down to a pseudoiso-tropic band of affected enamel measuringapproximately 10-15 jjm in depth. A sur-face zone (SZ) can be seen along thecavity wall, indicating the perpendiculardirection of attack by the artificial cariesmedium. SE = Sound Enamel. (Waterimbibition, Polarized Light 160x).

Figure 5. Secondary caries-like formationhas occurred as indicated by the presenceof an outer surface lesion (O) and a cavitywall lesion (W). The outer lesion depth is190 jum, while the wall lesion depth is70 /am at its greatest point. The wall le-sion appears as an extended wedge-shapewith its apex directed toward the dentino-enamel junction. They alloy restoration (A)has been lost partially during sectionpreparation. Although a negatively bire-fringent surface zone is present with theouter lesion, either a pseudoisotropic sur-face zone or a positively birefringent sur-face layer overlies the wall lesion. SE =Sound Enamel (Water imbibition, Polar-ized Light 160x).

Figure 6. Only an outer surface lesion(O) can be seen with this photomicro-graph of a tooth restored with a preven-tive resin (R). The boundary (arrow) of theouter lesion terminates at the point wherethe etched enamel is bonded to the resinmaterial. No evidence of a cavity walllesion can be seen along the enamel-resininterface (I). The resin appears to beadapted closely to the enamel cavity wall.SE = Sound enamel. (Water imbibition,Polarized Light 160x).

In contrast, no wall lesions were observed for teethrestored with the resin material (Figure 6), although theouter surface lesion depths were comparable for bothrestorative treatment groups (Table 1). In fact, the meanouter lesion depth was greater for the preventive resintreatment group. Typically, the outer surface lesion ter-minated at the point where bonding had occurred be-tween the etched-enamel cavity wall and preventive resin.The enamel-resin interface was intact and appeared to bean intimate one. No evidence of restoration loss wasnoted with specimens restored with resin, unlike the alloyrestorations. Occasionally, supplementary grooves thatwere not included in the Type A cavity preparation weresealed (Figure 7). The presence of even a minimalthickness of resin protected the supplementary groovesfrom the caries-like attack. In addition, fissures that werecaries free and not restored were observed to havedeveloped caries-like lesions along the walls and bases

of their fissures (Figure 8). However, adjacent fissures thathad been prepared and sealed with the preventive resinpossessed outer lesions that extended up to the pointwhere the preventive resin commenced, but no cavitywall lesions existed.

Also of interest was the width of the cavity prepara-tions at the cavosurfaces. Since the Type A preventivecavity was prepared using a No. Vz round bur, thepreparation was dependent on the size of the fissureprepared and the amount of affected enamel. In general,the typical preventive cavity was from .5 to 1 mm inwidth at the cavosurface. With the alloy preparation, itwas necessary to practice extension for prevention. Thisresulted in preparations ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 mm inwidth at their cavosurfaces.

20 CARIES-LIKE LESION FORMATION AROUND RESTORATIONS Hicks

Figure 8. (right) The contrast between theprotection against caries-like lesion formationafforded by a preventive resin (R) and thesusceptibility of an untreated fissure (F) to acaries-like attack is evident in this photomic-rograph. Caries-like lesions (C) have formedalong the walls of the fissures and adjacentto the interface between the surface enameland preventive resin. No cavity wall lesionscan be seen. SE = Sound Enamel. (Water im-bibition, Polarized Light, 80x).

Figure 7. (left) The ability of resin-treated enamel to resist a caries-like attack is illustrated further with this specimen. Asupplementary fissure (F) has been sealed with a minimal thickness (<50 Ltm) of resin. The supplementary fissure has beenprotected by the resin, as evidenced by the caries-like lesions (C) present in adjacent enamel that was not sealed. Most likely,the resin covering the supplementary fissure would not be detected clinically. Also, no lesions can be seen along the cavity wallsof the preventive resin restoration (R). SE = Sound Enamel. (Water imbibition, Polarized Light, 80x).

DiscussionIt is particularly important that a restorative material

be able to resist a secondary caries attack at its margin.Both alloy and preventive resin restorations were capableof affecting that portion of the secondary caries-likelesion formed due to microleakage, the cavity wall lesion.Wall lesion depths for alloy and preventive resin restora-tions were significantly less than depths for outer surfacelesions. With preventive resin restorations, no cavity walllesions were formed. In unfilled cavities, the wall lesiondepth has been reported to be equal to or greater thanthat for the outer surface lesion.10 n This would tend tosuggest that once a restoration is placed in a cavity, ac-cess to the cavity by hydrogen ions is restricted to asubstantial extent.

Secondary caries-like lesion formation has been shownto be dependent upon the degree to which a restorativematerial can prevent microleakage at the enamel-restoration interface (Figure 9). The ability of resin-treatedenamel to resist either an in vitro or in vivo caries attackis well documented.1214 The enamel-resin interface iscomposed of interdigitating etched enamel prisms andresin tags. These resin tags provide protection for theenamel against acid dissolution. In fact, sealed enamelhas been shown to be more resistant to dissolution byorganic acids than sound enamel alone.11"13 Even enamelsurfaces that have lost their protective resins experiencea lessened solubility rate13 and caries incidence14 thansound enamel. Residual resin tags that cannot be detectedeither clinically or microscopically have been suggestedto be responsible for this continued protection againstdemineralization.

In the present study, occlusal alloy restorations ex-perienced significantly greater degree of involvement withsecondary caries than preventive resins. No doubt thepresence of wall lesions was due to diffusion of hydrogenions along a microspace between the cavity wall and alloyrestoration. The formation of wall lesions also may bedue to defects in the restorative material at the periphery

of the restoration, or to defects in the enamel adjacentto the cavity wall.11 Although wall lesion formation oc-curred, the alloy restoration prevented the progress ofthe lesion to a significant extent. The wall lesions werenever equal to the outer surface lesions in depth. The dif-

OCCLUSAL CARIES

PREVENTIVE RESINRESTORATION (PRR)

ALLOY RESTORATION

PRR ALLOY

Figure 9. Secondary caries-like lesion formation around alloyand preventive resin restorations. The restoration of a ques-tionable occlusal surface with a a resin may result in a moreconservative approach. The involvement of the cavity wall withcaries-like lesions may depend upon the ability of the restorativematerial to adapt to the cavity. With alloy restorations, amicrospace may exist between the restoration and enamel cavitywall. With time, corrosion products may partially occlude thisspace. However, this microspace may allow diffusion of hy-drogen ions along the cavity wall and result in wall lesion for-mation in both the enamel and dentin. With preventive resinrestorations, the enamel-resin interface is composed of inter-digitating etched-enamel prisms and resin tags. This interfacemay prevent formation of caries-like lesions along the cavitywalls.

PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY: March 1984/Vol. 6 No. 1 21

ference between these depths was significant. In theclinical situation, the alloy restoration may respond dif-ferently due to the formation of corrosion products thatcould further reduce the microspace between the alloyand cavity wall. Also, metal ions in the alloy may havea detrimental effect on the microorganisms in plaque thatare responsible for wall lesion formation,as

An added benefit of the acid-etch technique is its ef-fect on microorganism.,;. Studies involving resin place-ment over frank carious lesions have shown that signifi-cant reductions in the number of viable microorganismsoccur within the first two weeks and result in a 99.9%decrease in viable microorganisms after a two-yearperiod.16-18 In fact, it has been shown that the acid-etching procedure itself may reduce viable micro-organisms by up to 75%.~s

The preventive resin restoration may serve as an alter-native to the alloy restoration in certain clinical situations.First, the preventive resin is a conservative method forrestoring either a questionable occlusal surface or an oc-clusal surface with caries in isolated pits and fissures.Since supplementary grooves would be protected witha resin, it would not be necessary to practice extensionfor prevention. Second, the preventive resin may beuseful especially with young children. The procedure re-quires only minimal preparation and may involve onlyisolated areas where dentin will be exposed. The limitedamount of preparation could alleviate the need foranesthesia. Third, should marginal breakdown occur, theresin may be repaired easily, whereas an alloy restora-tion must be replaced entirely. Fourth, if recurrent cariesshould develop, only the affected tissue needs to beremoved and resin added to the existing preventive resin.

The preventive resin restoration may not be an alter-native to the occlusal alloy in other clinical situations.With occlusal surfaces requiring extensive restoration ofstress-bearing areas, an alloy restoration may bepreferable until more conclusive research regarding thelongevity and physical strength of posterior resins is com-pleted. Preventive resins definitely would be contrain-dicated when a dry field cannot be maintained.

Conclusions

The results from this in vitro study indicate that:

1. Preventive resin restorations provide an effectivebarrier against a caries-like attack. This is thought tobe due to the presence of resin tags in intimate con-tact with etched enamel prisms.

2. Occlusal alloy restorations are not as effective aspreventive resin restorations in providing protectionagainst a caries-like attack. The presence of lesionsalong the cavity walls may be due to a microspace

between the prepared enamel and alloy restoration.The preventive resin restoration may serve as analternative to the occlusal alloy restoration in certainclinical situations.

Supported by NIH-NRSA Individual Postdoctoral Fellowship 5F32 DEO5256-03.

The author thanks Mr. Harvey F. Evans, Jr. for his technical assistance,and Ms. Wanda Valentine for helping prepare this manuscript.

Dr. Hicks is an assistant professor, Dental Research Unit and Depart-ment of Growth and Development, School of Dentistry, University ofColorado Health Sciences Center; Denver, Colo. 80262. Reprint requestsshould be sent to him.

1. Hyatt, T.P. Occlusal fissures: their frequency and danger. Howshall they be treated? Dent Items of Interest 46:493-507, 1924.

2. Hyatt, T.P. Prophylactic odontotomy: the ideal procedure in den-tistry for children. Dent Cosmos 78:353-70, 1936.

3. BiSdecker, C.F. The eradication of enamel fissures. Dent Items ofInterest 51:859-66, 1929.

4. Simonsen, R.J. Preventive resin restorations (I). Quintessence Int.1:69-76, 1978.

5. Simonsen, R.J. Preventive resin restorations: three-year results.JADA 100:535-39, 1980.

6. Silverstone, L.M. The histopatholgy of enamel lesions producedin vitro and their relation to enamel caries. PhD Thesis, Univer-sity of Bristol, 1967.

7. Hals, E., Nernaes, A. Histopathology of in vitro caries develop-ing around silver amalgam fillings. Caries Res 5:58-77, 1971.

8. Hals, E., Kvinnsland, I. Structure of experimental in vitro andin vivo lesions around composite (Addent XV® ) fillings. ScandJ Dent Res 82:517-26, 1974.

9. Kidd, E.A.M. Microleakage in relation to amalgam and compositerestorations. A laboratory study..Br Dent J 141:305-10, 1976.

10. Kidd, E.A.M. The histopathology of artificial lesions created invitro in relation to unfilled and filled cavities. Caries Res 11:173,-77,1977.

11. Hicks, M.J., Silverstone, L.M. Fissure sealants and dental enamel.A histological study of microleakage in vitro. Caries Res 16:353-60,1982.

12. Hicks, M.J., Si/verstone, L.M. The effect of sealant applicationand sealant loss on caries-like lesion formation in vitro. PediatrDent 4:111-14, 1982.

13. Silverstone, L.M. Fissure sealants: the susceptibility to dissolutionof acid-etched and subsequently abraded enamel in vitro. CariesRes 11:46-51, 1977.

14. Hinding, J. Extended cariostasis following loss of pit and fissuresealants from human teeth. J Dent Child 41:201-3, 1974.

15. Tinanoff, N., Weeks, D.B. Current status of SnF2 as an anti-plaque agent. Pediatr Dent 1:199-204, 1979.

16. Handelman, S.L., Washburn, F., Wopperer, P. Two-year reportof sealant effect on bacteria in dental caries. ]ADA 93:697-70, 1976.

17. Handelman, S.L., Leverett, D.H., Solomon, E.S., Brenner, C.M.Use of adhesive sealants over occlusal carious lesions: radiographicevaluation. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 9:256-59, 1981.

18. Jensen, O.E. Handelman, S.L. Effect of an autopolymerizingsealant on viability of microflora in occlusal dental caries. ScandJ Dent Res 99:382-88, 1980.

22 CARIES-LIKE LESION FORMATION AROUND RESTORATIONS: Hicks