Objectives To evaluate the properties of experimental infiltrant blends by comparing them with the commercial infiltrant Icon? and penetration homogeneity into enamel caries lesions. Methods Groups were set up as follows: G1 (TEGDMA 100%); G2 (TEGDMA 80%, Ethanol 20%); G3 (TEGDMA 80%, HEMA 20%); G4 (TEGDMA 75%, BisEMA 25%); G5 (TEGDMA 60%, BisEMA 20%, Ethanol 20%); G6 (TEGDMA 60%, BisEMA 20%, HEMA 20%); G7 (TEGDMA 75%, UDMA 25%); G8 (TEGDMA 60%, UDMA 20%, Ethanol 20%); G9 (TEGDMA 60%, UDMA 20%, HEMA 20%) and Icon ?. Ten specimens were comprised by each group for the following tests (n = 10): degree of conversion (DC), elastic modulus (EM), Knoop hardness (KH), and softening ratio (SR). Infiltrant penetration was evaluated using confocal microscopy (CLSM). Data were subjected to two-way ANOVA and a Tukey's test (5%). Data comparing experimental materials and Icon? were analysed using ANOVA and Dunnett's test (5%). Results The highest DC values were found in G1, G7, G8, and G9. The lowest DC values were found in G2, G4, G5, and G6. EM and KHN were significantly lower in HEMA and with ethanol addition for all blends, except for G9. There was no significant difference among the groups regarding SR, and it was not possible to take KHN readings of G2, G5, and G8 after storage. There was no significant difference among groups for infiltrant penetration into enamel lesions. Conclusions The addition of hydrophobic monomers and solvents into TEGDMA blends affected DC, EM, and KHN. UDMA added to TEGDMA resulted in an increase in DC, EM, and KHN. Overall, solvents added to monomer blends resulted in decreased properties. The addition of hydrophobic monomers and solvents into TEGDMA blends does not improve the penetration depth of the infiltrants.
展开▼
