Effect of adhesive primer on dentin remineralization by an alkasite compared to a glass hybrid restorative material: an in vitro study

Background Bioactive restorative materials can promote dentin remineralization, but their efficacy may be influenced by adhesive interfaces. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive primer on the remineralization potential of an alkasite material (Cention Forte) compared to a glass hybrid material (Equia Forte HT) on artificially demineralized dentin. Methods Forty-two human molars with standardized Class V cavities were chemically demineralized and randomly divided into three restorative groups (n = 14). Cention Forte without primer (CF − P), Cention Forte with primer (CF + P), and Equia Forte HT (EF). After restoration, all samples underwent 14 days of pH cycling. Remineralization was evaluated using Vickers microhardness and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) at baseline (T₀), after demineralization (T₁), and after pH cycling (T₂). Recovery percentages were calculated for microhardness and mineral content (calcium, phosphorus, oxygen and carbon). Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA and post hoc tests (p < 0.05). Results All groups showed significant increases in microhardness after pH cycling (p < 0.0001). CF − P demonstrated the highest microhardness recovery (74.21 ± 2.48%), followed by EF (72.50 ± 2.10%), while CF + P showed the lowest recovery (61.36 ± 3.22%; p < 0.001). EDX analysis revealed significant gains in calcium and phosphorus in all groups. Calcium recovery was highest in CF − P (76.10 ± 5.58%) and EF (75.44 ± 2.85%), both significantly higher than in CF + P (68.91 ± 3.66%; p < 0.001). Phosphorus recovery followed a similar pattern. Conclusion The use of an adhesive primer significantly reduced the remineralization capacity of the alkasite material. Cention Forte without primer performed comparably to the glass hybrid Equia Forte HT, whereas primer application limited its bioactive efficacy.