The effect of proanthocyanidin on dentin microhardness and the bond strenght of biodentine

The aim of our study is to examine the effect of Proanthocyanidin (PA), a new irrigation solution, on the dentin microhardness and the bond strength of Biodentine, which is used as a barrier material, in comparison with other irrigation agents. 112 single-canal teeth were decorated, then prepared with the ProTaper file system (F5) and #1-6 Peeso reamers to obtain a standard internal diameter. For the microhardness test, the teeth were divided into 3 experimental (n=30) in which 1.5% NaOCl, 2% CHX and PA (25% GSE) were applied and 1 control (n=10) groups. Two dentin sections of 2 mm thickness were obtained from the coronal of each root. Vickers microhardness test was used to evaluate the effects of solutions for microhardness. For the bond strength test, 3 experimental (n=54) and 1 control (n=18) groups were formed. After the application of the solutions, Ca(OH)2 was placed in all groups. After two weeks, Ca(OH)2 was removed and two dentin sections of 2 mm thickness were obtained from the coronal parts of the roots. Biodentine was placed on dentin sections and bond strength was measured by push-out test. The failure types were categorized. All data were analyzed using repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) at p<0.05 significance level. Pairwise comparisons were made using Bonferroni correction. There was no statistically significant difference among the DW, PA and CHX groups in terms of microhardness (p>0.05). Microhardness values in the NaOCl group decreased significantly with all groups (p<0.05. There was a statistically significant difference among the groups in Bond strength evaluation. It was found significantly lower in the PA group than in the NaOCl group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between CHX and NaOCl, PA groups in terms of bond strength values (p>0.05). Mix failures was observed at a higher rate in all groups. Adhesive failures was most common in the PA group, but there was no significant difference among the other groups (p>0.05). Cohesive failures was most common in the control group, and there was only a significant difference between them and the PA group (p<0.05).