Water distribution in dentin matrices

Bound vs. unbound water

Kelli A. Agee, Anuradha Prakki, Tariq Abu-Haimed, Ghada H. Naguib, Manar Abu Nawareg, Arzu Tezvergil-Mutluay, Debora L S Scheffel, Chen Chen, Seung Soon Jang, Hyea Hwang, Martha Brackett, Geneviéve Grégoire, Franklin R. Tay, Lorenzo Breschi, David H. Pashley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective This work measured the amount of bound versus unbound water in completely-demineralized dentin. Methods Dentin beams prepared from extracted human teeth were completely demineralized, rinsed and dried to constant mass. They were rehydrated in 41% relative humidity (RH), while gravimetrically measuring their mass increase until the first plateau was reached at 0.064 (vacuum) or 0.116 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). The specimens were then exposed to 60% RH until attaining the second plateau at 0.220 (vacuum) or 0.191 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite), and subsequently exposed to 99% RH until attaining the third plateau at 0.493 (vacuum) or 0.401 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). Results Exposure of the first layer of bound water to 0% RH for 5 min produced a -0.3% loss of bound water; in the second layer of bound water it caused a -3.3% loss of bound water; in the third layer it caused a -6% loss of bound water. Immersion in 100% ethanol or acetone for 5 min produced a 2.8 and 1.9% loss of bound water from the first layer, respectively; it caused a -4 and -7% loss of bound water in the second layer, respectively; and a -17 and -23% loss of bound water in the third layer. Bound water represented 21-25% of total dentin water. Chemical dehydration of water-saturated dentin with ethanol/acetone for 1 min only removed between 25 and 35% of unbound water, respectively. Significance Attempts to remove bound water by evaporation were not very successful. Chemical dehydration with 100% acetone was more successful than 100% ethanol especially the third layer of bound water. Since unbound water represents between 75 and 79% of total matrix water, the more such water can be removed, the more resin can be infiltrated.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)205-216
Number of pages12
JournalDental Materials
Volume31
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2015

Fingerprint

Dentin
Water
Humidity
Calcium Sulfate
Atmospheric humidity
Vacuum
Acetone
Ethanol
Dehydration
Immersion

Keywords

  • Adhesive dentistry
  • Bound water
  • Bulk water
  • Collagen
  • Dentin
  • Hydrogen bonding

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Materials Science(all)
  • Dentistry(all)
  • Mechanics of Materials

Cite this

Agee, K. A., Prakki, A., Abu-Haimed, T., Naguib, G. H., Nawareg, M. A., Tezvergil-Mutluay, A., ... Pashley, D. H. (2015). Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water. Dental Materials, 31(3), 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007

Water distribution in dentin matrices : Bound vs. unbound water. / Agee, Kelli A.; Prakki, Anuradha; Abu-Haimed, Tariq; Naguib, Ghada H.; Nawareg, Manar Abu; Tezvergil-Mutluay, Arzu; Scheffel, Debora L S; Chen, Chen; Jang, Seung Soon; Hwang, Hyea; Brackett, Martha; Grégoire, Geneviéve; Tay, Franklin R.; Breschi, Lorenzo; Pashley, David H.

In: Dental Materials, Vol. 31, No. 3, 01.03.2015, p. 205-216.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Agee, KA, Prakki, A, Abu-Haimed, T, Naguib, GH, Nawareg, MA, Tezvergil-Mutluay, A, Scheffel, DLS, Chen, C, Jang, SS, Hwang, H, Brackett, M, Grégoire, G, Tay, FR, Breschi, L & Pashley, DH 2015, 'Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water', Dental Materials, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007
Agee KA, Prakki A, Abu-Haimed T, Naguib GH, Nawareg MA, Tezvergil-Mutluay A et al. Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water. Dental Materials. 2015 Mar 1;31(3):205-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007
Agee, Kelli A. ; Prakki, Anuradha ; Abu-Haimed, Tariq ; Naguib, Ghada H. ; Nawareg, Manar Abu ; Tezvergil-Mutluay, Arzu ; Scheffel, Debora L S ; Chen, Chen ; Jang, Seung Soon ; Hwang, Hyea ; Brackett, Martha ; Grégoire, Geneviéve ; Tay, Franklin R. ; Breschi, Lorenzo ; Pashley, David H. / Water distribution in dentin matrices : Bound vs. unbound water. In: Dental Materials. 2015 ; Vol. 31, No. 3. pp. 205-216.
@article{4f88cedea88e4c2381822f1927b8b20f,
title = "Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water",
abstract = "Objective This work measured the amount of bound versus unbound water in completely-demineralized dentin. Methods Dentin beams prepared from extracted human teeth were completely demineralized, rinsed and dried to constant mass. They were rehydrated in 41{\%} relative humidity (RH), while gravimetrically measuring their mass increase until the first plateau was reached at 0.064 (vacuum) or 0.116 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). The specimens were then exposed to 60{\%} RH until attaining the second plateau at 0.220 (vacuum) or 0.191 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite), and subsequently exposed to 99{\%} RH until attaining the third plateau at 0.493 (vacuum) or 0.401 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). Results Exposure of the first layer of bound water to 0{\%} RH for 5 min produced a -0.3{\%} loss of bound water; in the second layer of bound water it caused a -3.3{\%} loss of bound water; in the third layer it caused a -6{\%} loss of bound water. Immersion in 100{\%} ethanol or acetone for 5 min produced a 2.8 and 1.9{\%} loss of bound water from the first layer, respectively; it caused a -4 and -7{\%} loss of bound water in the second layer, respectively; and a -17 and -23{\%} loss of bound water in the third layer. Bound water represented 21-25{\%} of total dentin water. Chemical dehydration of water-saturated dentin with ethanol/acetone for 1 min only removed between 25 and 35{\%} of unbound water, respectively. Significance Attempts to remove bound water by evaporation were not very successful. Chemical dehydration with 100{\%} acetone was more successful than 100{\%} ethanol especially the third layer of bound water. Since unbound water represents between 75 and 79{\%} of total matrix water, the more such water can be removed, the more resin can be infiltrated.",
keywords = "Adhesive dentistry, Bound water, Bulk water, Collagen, Dentin, Hydrogen bonding",
author = "Agee, {Kelli A.} and Anuradha Prakki and Tariq Abu-Haimed and Naguib, {Ghada H.} and Nawareg, {Manar Abu} and Arzu Tezvergil-Mutluay and Scheffel, {Debora L S} and Chen Chen and Jang, {Seung Soon} and Hyea Hwang and Martha Brackett and Genevi{\'e}ve Gr{\'e}goire and Tay, {Franklin R.} and Lorenzo Breschi and Pashley, {David H.}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "205--216",
journal = "Dental Materials",
issn = "0109-5641",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Water distribution in dentin matrices

T2 - Bound vs. unbound water

AU - Agee, Kelli A.

AU - Prakki, Anuradha

AU - Abu-Haimed, Tariq

AU - Naguib, Ghada H.

AU - Nawareg, Manar Abu

AU - Tezvergil-Mutluay, Arzu

AU - Scheffel, Debora L S

AU - Chen, Chen

AU - Jang, Seung Soon

AU - Hwang, Hyea

AU - Brackett, Martha

AU - Grégoire, Geneviéve

AU - Tay, Franklin R.

AU - Breschi, Lorenzo

AU - Pashley, David H.

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Objective This work measured the amount of bound versus unbound water in completely-demineralized dentin. Methods Dentin beams prepared from extracted human teeth were completely demineralized, rinsed and dried to constant mass. They were rehydrated in 41% relative humidity (RH), while gravimetrically measuring their mass increase until the first plateau was reached at 0.064 (vacuum) or 0.116 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). The specimens were then exposed to 60% RH until attaining the second plateau at 0.220 (vacuum) or 0.191 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite), and subsequently exposed to 99% RH until attaining the third plateau at 0.493 (vacuum) or 0.401 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). Results Exposure of the first layer of bound water to 0% RH for 5 min produced a -0.3% loss of bound water; in the second layer of bound water it caused a -3.3% loss of bound water; in the third layer it caused a -6% loss of bound water. Immersion in 100% ethanol or acetone for 5 min produced a 2.8 and 1.9% loss of bound water from the first layer, respectively; it caused a -4 and -7% loss of bound water in the second layer, respectively; and a -17 and -23% loss of bound water in the third layer. Bound water represented 21-25% of total dentin water. Chemical dehydration of water-saturated dentin with ethanol/acetone for 1 min only removed between 25 and 35% of unbound water, respectively. Significance Attempts to remove bound water by evaporation were not very successful. Chemical dehydration with 100% acetone was more successful than 100% ethanol especially the third layer of bound water. Since unbound water represents between 75 and 79% of total matrix water, the more such water can be removed, the more resin can be infiltrated.

AB - Objective This work measured the amount of bound versus unbound water in completely-demineralized dentin. Methods Dentin beams prepared from extracted human teeth were completely demineralized, rinsed and dried to constant mass. They were rehydrated in 41% relative humidity (RH), while gravimetrically measuring their mass increase until the first plateau was reached at 0.064 (vacuum) or 0.116 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). The specimens were then exposed to 60% RH until attaining the second plateau at 0.220 (vacuum) or 0.191 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite), and subsequently exposed to 99% RH until attaining the third plateau at 0.493 (vacuum) or 0.401 g H2O/g dry mass (Drierite). Results Exposure of the first layer of bound water to 0% RH for 5 min produced a -0.3% loss of bound water; in the second layer of bound water it caused a -3.3% loss of bound water; in the third layer it caused a -6% loss of bound water. Immersion in 100% ethanol or acetone for 5 min produced a 2.8 and 1.9% loss of bound water from the first layer, respectively; it caused a -4 and -7% loss of bound water in the second layer, respectively; and a -17 and -23% loss of bound water in the third layer. Bound water represented 21-25% of total dentin water. Chemical dehydration of water-saturated dentin with ethanol/acetone for 1 min only removed between 25 and 35% of unbound water, respectively. Significance Attempts to remove bound water by evaporation were not very successful. Chemical dehydration with 100% acetone was more successful than 100% ethanol especially the third layer of bound water. Since unbound water represents between 75 and 79% of total matrix water, the more such water can be removed, the more resin can be infiltrated.

KW - Adhesive dentistry

KW - Bound water

KW - Bulk water

KW - Collagen

KW - Dentin

KW - Hydrogen bonding

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925392330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925392330&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007

DO - 10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.007

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 205

EP - 216

JO - Dental Materials

JF - Dental Materials

SN - 0109-5641

IS - 3

ER -