Michael B Miller1, Laura A López2, Ryan L Quock3. 1. Department of General Practice and Dental Public Health, University of Texas School of Dentistry at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA. 2. University of Texas School of Dentistry at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Restorative Dentistry $ Prosthodontics, University of Texas School of Dentistry at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess if there was a perceptible difference in staining of restorations in silver diamine fluoride (SDF)-treated teeth, with or without the subsequent application of potassium iodide (KI). METHODS: 20 extracted teeth with frank cavitated carious lesions were prepared with a spoon excavator to remove superficial soft carious dentin and then randomly divided into two groups of 10. The control group was treated with 38% SDF and then restored with glass-ionomer. The experimental group received similar treatment, with the additional step of KI applied before restoration. All teeth were subjected to 500 thermocycles between 5°C and 55°C, followed by storage in artificial saliva at 37°C for 30 days. Three blinded examiners evaluated all 20 teeth for intensity of staining on a scale from 0-5. Wilcoxon rank sum test compared average staining intensity between control and experimental groups of teeth as perceived by each examiner. RESULTS: No significant differences were found (P values: 0.93, 0.67, and 0.97). An aggregate comparison of staining perception between control and experimental groups by repeated measure analysis was done treating the outcome as Poisson distribution also finding no significant difference (P= 0.82). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The application of potassium iodide after silver diamine fluoride on caries-affected teeth may improve initial esthetic appearance, but after placement of a glass ionomer restoration, potassium iodide does not seem to result in any significant difference in staining.
PURPOSE: To assess if there was a perceptible difference in staining of restorations in silver diamine fluoride (SDF)-treated teeth, with or without the subsequent application of potassium iodide (KI). METHODS: 20 extracted teeth with frank cavitated carious lesions were prepared with a spoon excavator to remove superficial soft carious dentin and then randomly divided into two groups of 10. The control group was treated with 38% SDF and then restored with glass-ionomer. The experimental group received similar treatment, with the additional step of KI applied before restoration. All teeth were subjected to 500 thermocycles between 5°C and 55°C, followed by storage in artificial saliva at 37°C for 30 days. Three blinded examiners evaluated all 20 teeth for intensity of staining on a scale from 0-5. Wilcoxon rank sum test compared average staining intensity between control and experimental groups of teeth as perceived by each examiner. RESULTS: No significant differences were found (P values: 0.93, 0.67, and 0.97). An aggregate comparison of staining perception between control and experimental groups by repeated measure analysis was done treating the outcome as Poisson distribution also finding no significant difference (P= 0.82). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The application of potassium iodide after silver diamine fluoride on caries-affected teeth may improve initial esthetic appearance, but after placement of a glass ionomer restoration, potassium iodide does not seem to result in any significant difference in staining.