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 journalArticlepeer-review

75 Scopus citations

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

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Academy of Dental Materials.

Funding

This work was supported, in part, by grant R01 DE015306 from the NIDCR and a GRU/GT Seed Grant to DP (PI) and by the King Abdulaziz University that supports DP as a Highly Cited Scholar. The authors are grateful to Mrs. Michelle Barnes for her secretarial support.

FundersFunder number
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchR01DE015306
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research
King Abdulaziz University

    Keywords

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

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • General Materials Science
    • General Dentistry
    • Mechanics of Materials

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Water distribution in dentin matrices: Bound vs. unbound water'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this