This is a little bit hard for my shortbrain to follow based on the brief abstract. Human dentin has a higher water content than enamel. These are extracted cow teeth, right?

If half of the bovine teeth have been kept hydrated it makes sense to me that the erbium laser would ablate this dentin more efficiently. I suspect that it doesn’t make a whole heck of lot of difference in water content if the enamel has been kept soaked in water. I am surprised the study showed that only the 2940nm wavelength ablated the hydrated dentin more efficiently. Perhaps because this wavelength is more highly absorbed by water but I would think that 2780nm would also be much more efficient in hydrated dentin. Based on my experience with both wavelengths I suspect this difference is clinically insignificant on in vivo human dentin.

The last sentence of the abstract makes complete sense to me. While both wavelengths will cut teeth “dry” ablation is more efficient when the treatment site is wet, cooled and products of ablation are rinsed away for the next pulse.