Difference assessment of composite resins and sound tooth applicable in the resin-imbedded tooth for resin repair using fluorescence, microhardness, DIAGNOdent, and X-ray image

Objective Visual differentiation of resin and tooth in a tooth cavity is not simple due to their highly similar shade. The purpose of the present study was to find any noninvasive method which can effectively differentiate resin from sound tooth in a resin-imbedded tooth for resin repair. Materials and methods For the study, various resin products were imbedded into the cavity of sound tooth. By applying laser of different wavelengths, autofluorescence (AF) of sound tooth and resin products were obtained. Microhardness, X-ray radiograph, and DIAGNOdent were tested for each tooth, resin product, and resin-imbedded tooth. Results For the AF spectra obtained using the 405-nm wavelength, sound tooth has emission peak at 440–470 nm and near 490 nm. Sound tooth has several times higher microhardness than resin products regardless of position in tooth subsurface. Due to the difference of radiopaque fillers’ composition and concentration, resin products have different brightness in the X-ray radiograph. DIAGNOdent readings for tooth and resin products were inconsistently different, and the difference of obtained values was slightly not to be applicable for the differentiation. Conclusion Among the tested methods, with noninvasive treatment, AF spectrum by the 405-nm wavelength showed the apparent difference between resin and tooth. Clinical significance For the resin repair in a resin-imbedded tooth cavity, AF spectrum produced by 405-nm wavelength could be a useful method in tracing the resin-tooth boundary if combined with conventional X-ray radiography.