THE EFFECT of DENTIN PRETREATMENT on THE MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH of SELF-ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

INFLUENCE of DIFFERENT SURFACE CONDITIONING PROTOCOLS on MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH of SELF-ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS TO DENTIN

Statement of problem. According to manufacturers, bonding with self-adhesive resin cements can be achieved without any pretreatment steps such as etching, priming, or bonding. However, the benefit of saving time with these simplified luting systems may be realized at the expense of compromising the bonding capacity.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to assess whether different dentin conditioning protocols influence the bond performance of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin.Material and methods. Flat dentin surfaces from 48 human molars were divided into 4 groups (n=12): 1) control, no conditioning; 2) H(3)PO(4), etching with 37% H(3)PO(4) for 15 seconds; 3) SEBond, bonding with self-etching primer adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond); and 4) EDTA, etching with 0.1M EDTA for 60 seconds. The specimens from each dentin pre-treatment were bonded using the self-adhesive cements RelyX Unicem, Maxcem or Multilink Sprint (n=4). The resin-cement-dentin specimens were stored in water at 37 degrees C for 7 days, and serially sectioned to produce beam specimens of 1.0 mm(2) cross-sectional area. Microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) testing was performed at 1.0 mm/min. Data (MPa) were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparisons test (alpha=.05). Fractured specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope (x40) and classified as adhesive, mixed, or cohesive. Additional bonded interfaces were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).Results. Cement-dentin mu TBS was affected by the dentin conditioning approach (P <.001). RelyX Unicem attained statistically similar bond strengths to all pre-treated dentin surfaces. H(3)PO(4)-etching prior to the application of Maxcem resulted in bond strength values that were significantly higher than the other groups. The lowest mu TBS were attained when luting Multilink Sprint per manufacturers' recommendations, while H(3)PO(4)-etching produced the highest values followed by Clearfil SE bonding and EDTA. SEM observations disclosed an enhanced potential of the self-adhesive cements to form a hybrid layer when applied following manufacturer's instructions.Conclusions. When evaluated self-adhesive resin cements are used, selectively etching dentin with H(3)PO(4) prior to luting results in the most effective bonding. (J Prosthet Dent 2011;105:227-235)

Durability of Microtensile Bond to Nonetched and Etched Feldspar Ceramic: Self-adhesive Resin Cements vs Conventional Resin

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of thermocycling (TC), self-adhesive resin cements and surface conditioning on the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) between feldspathic ceramic blocks and resin cements.Materials and Methods: Fifty-six feldspathic ceramic blocks (10 x 7 x 5 mm) (Vita Mark II) were divided into groups according to the factors "resin cement" (3 cements) and "surface conditioning" (no conditioning or conditioning [10% hydrofluoric acid etching for 5 min + silanization]) (n = 8): group 1: conditioning+Variolink II (control group); group 2: no conditioning+Biscem; group 3: no conditioning+RelyX U100; group 4: no conditioning+Maxcem Elite; group 5: conditioning+Biscem; group 6: conditioning+RelyX U100; group 7: conditioning+Maxcem Elite. The ceramic-cement blocks were sectioned to produce non-trimmed bar specimens (adhered cross-sectional area: 1 +/- 0.1 mm(2)), which were divided into two storage conditions: dry, mu TBS immediately after cutting; TC (12,000x, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C). Statistical significance was deterimined using two-way ANOVA (7 strategies and 2 storage conditions) and the post-hoc Tukey test (p<0.05).Results: Resin cement and thermocycling affected the mu TBS significantly (p = 0.001). In the dry condition, group 5 (18 +/- 6.5 MPa) presented the lowest values of mu TBS when compared to the other groups. TC decreased the mean mu TBS values significantly (p<0.05) for all resin cements tested (9.7 +/- 2.3 to 22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa), except for the resin cement RelyX U100 (22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa). In groups 3 and 4, it was not possible to measure mu TBS, since these groups had 100% pre-test failures during sectioning. Moreover, the same occurred in group 2 after TC, where 100% failure was observed during thermocycling (spontaneous failures).Conclusion: Hydrofluoric acid etching and silanization of the feldspathic ceramic surface are essential for bonding self-adhesive resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used. Non-etched ceramic is not recommended.

Interaction between total-etch and self-etch adhesives and conventional and self-adhesive resin cements

The aim of this study was to compare the bond strength to enamel between resin cements combined with total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems and a self-adhesive cement. Eighty bovine incisors had their buccal surface ground flat exposing a plane area in the enamel. Eighty Artglass resin cylinders measuring 3 mm in diameter and 4 mm in height were fabricated. The teeth were divided into eight groups of 10 teeth each and the resin cylinders were cemented with different adhesive systems and resin cements; G1: RelyX Unicem (self-adhesive cement); G2: H 3PO 4 + Single Bond + RelyX ARC; G3: AdheSE + Variolink II; G4: H 3PO 4 + Excite + Variolink II; G5: Xeno III + Enforce; G6: H 3PO 4 + Prime&Bond NT + Enforce; G7: Biatite Primers 1 and 2 + Bistite II DC; G8: H 3PO 4 + Bistite Primers 1 and 2 + Bistite II DC. After application of the adhesives, the cylinders were cemented according to manufacturer instructions. The specimens were submitted to 2000 thermal cycles at a temperature ranging from 5±5°C to 55±5°C, and shear bond strength was then tested at a variety of 1 mm/min. The data were analyzed by ANOVA and the Tukey's test (á=5%), obtaining a p value of 0.00. The following mean (±standard deviation) bond strength values were observed for each group: G1: 5.14(±0.99)a; G3: 16.23(±4.69)b; G7: 17.82(±3.66)b; G5: 18.48(±2.88)bc; G8: 20.15(±4.12)bc; G4: 22.85(±3.08)cd; G2: 24.96(±2.89)d; G6: 26.07(±1.69)d. Groups followed by the same letters did not differ significantly. For most of the resin cements tested, the application of adhesive systems using acid etching resulted in a higher bond strength when compared to the self-etch adhesive systems and to the self-adhesive cement.

Durability of the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to human dentin

This study subjected two self-adhesive resin cements and two conventional resin cements to dry and aging conditions, to compare their microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) to dentin. Using four different luting systems (n = 10), 40 composite resin blocks (each 5x5x4 mm) were cemented to flat human crown dentin surfaces. The specimens were stored in water for 24 hours (37°C), at which point each specimen was sectioned along two axes to obtain beams that were divided randomly into two groups: dry samples, which were tested immediately, and samples that were subjected to accelerated aging conditions (12, 000 thermocycles followed by storage for 150 days). The μTBS results were affected significantly by the luting system used (P < 40001). Only the μTBS of Rely-X Unicem was reduced significantly after aging; the μTBS remained stable or increased for the other self-adhesive resin cement and the two conventional cements.

Influence of technique and manipulation on self-adhesive resin cements used to cement intraradicular posts

Statement of problem: Resin cements are widely used to cement intraradicular posts, but bond strength is significantly influenced by the technique and material used for cementation. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of 3 self-adhesive cements used to cement intraradicular glass fiber posts. The cements all required different application and handling techniques. Material and Methods: Forty-five human maxillary canines were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups n= 15 by drawing lots: Group BIS – Biscem, Group BRE – Breeze, and Group MAX – Maxcem. Each group was divided into 3 subgroups according to application and handling techniques: Sub-group A – Automix/Point tip applicator, Sub-group L – Handmix/Lentulo, and Sub-group C – Handmix/Centrix. Cementation of the posts was performed according to the manufacturers’ instructions. The push-out test was performed with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, and bond strength was expressed in megapascals. The results were evaluated by 2-way ANOVA and the all pairwise multiple comparison procedures (Tukey test) (?=.05). Results: Breeze cement showed the highest average for the subgroups A, L, and C when compared to the Biscem cement and Maxcem Elite (P<.05). Statistically significant differences among the subgroups were only observed for Biscem. Conclusions: This study shows that application and handling techniques may influence the bond strength of different self-adhesive cements when used for intraradicular post cementation.

Push-out bond strength of CAD/CAM-ceramic luted to dentin with self-adhesive resin cements

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the initial and the artificially aged push-out bond strength between ceramic and dentin produced by one of five resin cements. METHODS: Two-hundred direct ceramic restorations (IPS Empress CAD) were luted to standardized Class I cavities in extracted human molars using one of four self-adhesive cements (SpeedCEM, RelyX Unicem Aplicap, SmartCem2 and iCEM) or a reference etch-and-rinse resin cement (Syntac/Variolink II) (n=40/cement). Push-out bond strength (PBS) was measured (1) after 24h water storage (non-aged group; n=20/cement) or (2) after artificial ageing with 5000 thermal cycles followed by 6 months humid storage (aged group; n=20/cement). Nonparametrical ANOVA and pairwise Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Bonferroni-Holm adjustment were applied for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at alpha=0.05. In addition, failure mode and fracture pattern were analyzed by stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: Whereas no statistically significant effect of storage condition was found (p=0.441), there was a significant effect of resin cement (p<0.0001): RelyX Unicem showed significantly higher PBS than the other cements. Syntac/Variolink II showed significantly higher PBS than SmartCEM2 (p<0.001). No significant differences were found between SpeedCEM, SmartCem2, and iCEM. The predominant failure mode was adhesive failure of cements at the dentin interface except for RelyX Unicem which in most cases showed cohesive failure in ceramic. SIGNIFICANCE: The resin cements showed marked differences in push-out bond strength when used for luting ceramic restorations to dentin. Variolink II with the etch-and-rinse adhesive Syntac did not perform better than three of the four self-adhesive resin cements tested.

Microtensile bond strengths and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of self-adhesive and self-etch resin cements to intact and etched enamel

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Bonding Efficacy of New Self-etching, Self-adhesive Dual-curing Resin Cements to Dental Enamel

Purpose: This study evaluated the efficacy of the union between two new self-etching self-adhesive resin cements and enamel using the microtensile bond strength test.Materials and Methods: Buccal enamel of 80 bovine teeth was submitted to finishing and polishing with metallographic paper to a refinement of #600, in order to obtain a 5-mm(2) flat area. Blocks (2 x 4 x 4 mm) of laboratory composite resin were cemented to enamel according to different protocols: (1) untreated enamel + RelyX Unicem cement (RX group); (2) untreated enamel + Bifix SE cement (BF group); (3) enamel acid etching and application of resin adhesive Single Bond + RelyX Unicem (RXA group); (4) enamel acid etching and application of resin adhesive Solobond M + Bifix SE (BFA group). After 7 days of storage in distillated water at 37 degrees C, the blocks were sectioned for obtaining microbar specimens with an adhesive area of 1 mm(2) (n = 120). Specimens were submitted to the microtensile bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results (in MPa) were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tu key's test.Results: Enamel pre-treatment with phosphoric acid and resin adhesive (27.9 and 30.3 for RXA and BFA groups) significantly improved (p <= 0.05) the adhesion of both cements to enamel compared to the union achieved with as-polished enamel (9.9 and 6.0 for RX and BF).Conclusion: Enamel pre-treatment with acid etching and the application of resin adhesive significantly improved the bond efficacy of both luting agents compared to the union achieved with as-polished enamel.

The effect of self-adhesive and self-etching resin cements on the bond strength of nonmetallic posts in different root thirds

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of self-adhesive and self-etching resin cements on the bond strength of nonmetallic posts in different root regions. Sixty single-rooted human teeth were decoronated, endodontically treated, post-space prepared, and divided into six groups. Glass-fiber (GF) posts (Exacto, Angelus) and fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) posts (EverStick, StickTeck) were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement (Breeze) (SA) (Pentral Clinical) and self-etching resin cement (Panavia-F) (SE) (Kuraray). Six 1-mm-thick rods were obtained from the cervical (C), middle (M), and apical (A) regions of the roots. The specimens were then subjected to microtensile testing in a special machine (BISCO; Schaumburg, IL, USA) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Microtensile bond strength data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests. Means (and SD) of the MPa were: GF/SA/C: 14.32 (2.84), GF/SA/M: 10.69 (2.72), GF/SA/A: 6.77 (2.17), GF/SE/C: 11.56 (4.13), GF/SE/M: 6.49 (2.54), GF/SE/A: 3.60 (1.29), FRC/SA/C: 16.89 (2.66), FRC/SA/M: 13.18 (2.19), FRC/SA/A: 8.45 (1.77), FRC/SE/C: 13.69 (3.26), FRC/SE/M: 9.58 (2.23), FRC/SE/A: 5.62 (2.12). The difference among the regions was statistically significant for all groups (p < 0.05). The self-adhesive resin cement showed better results than the self-etching resin cement when compared to each post (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences in bond strengths of the resin cements when comparable to each post (p > 0.05). The bond strength values were significantly affected by the resin cement and the highest values were found for self-adhesive resin cement.

Influence of Er,Cr: YSGG laser on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement

The purpose of this study was to investigate the bond strength of fiber post previously laser treated root canals. Forty single-rooted bovine teeth were endodontically treated, randomly and equally divided into two main groups according to the type of pretreatment: G1: 2.5% NaOCl (control group); and G2: Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Each group was further subdivided into 2 groups based on the category of adhesive systems/ luting materials used: a: an etch-and-rinse resin cement (Single Bond/RelyX ARC; 3M ESPE), and b: a self-adhesive resin cement (Rely X Unicem; 3M ESPE). Three 1.5 mm thick slabs were obtained per root and the push-out test was performed at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min until post dislodgement occurred. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey's test at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. Analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) among the groups G1a (25.44 ± 2.35) and G1b (23.62 ± 3.48), G2a (11.77 ± 2.67) and G2b (9.93 ± 3.37). Fractures were observed at the interface between the dentin and the resin in all groups. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation did not influence on the bond strength of the resin cements and the etch-and-rinse resin cement had better results on bond strength than self-adhesive resin cement.

Indirect resin onlay cemented with self-adhesive resin cement: a comprehensive clinical overview

Advances in adhesive technology and esthetic dental materials have permitted clinicians to perform conservative preparation of the dentition for onlay restorations. Indirect resin onlays are a great alternative to dental crowns for reestablishment the function and esthetic in teeth with great destruction.

The effect of polymerization mode on monomer conversion, free radical entrapment, and interaction with hydroxyapatite of commercial self-adhesive cements

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Interaction of fluorescence of resin cements with glass ceramics

Poster presented at the 24th Annual Meeting of the Portuguese Dental Association, Lisbon, 12-14 November 2015.

Evaluation of Bond Strength of Self-adhesive Cements to Dentin With or Without Application of Adhesive Systems

Purpose: To evaluate the bond strength of indirect restorations to dentin using self-adhesive cements with and without the application of adhesive systems.Material and Methods: Seventy-two bovine incisors were used, in which the buccal surfaces were ground down to expose an area of dentin measuring a minimum of 4 x 4 mm. The indirect resin composite Resilab was used to make 72 blocks, which were cemented onto the dentin surface of the teeth and divided into 4 groups (n = 18): group 1: self-adhesive resin cement BiFix SE, applied according to manufacturer's recommendations; group 2: self-adhesive resin cement RelyX Unicem, used according to manufacturer's recommendations; group 3: etch-and-rinse Solobond M adhesive system + BiFix SE; group 4: etch-and-rinse Single Bond 2 adhesive system + RelyX Unicem. The specimens were sectioned into sticks and subjected to microtensile testing in a universal testing machine (EMIC DL-200MF). Data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha = 5%).Results: The mean values (+/- standard deviation) obtained for the groups were: group 1: 15.28 (+/- 8.17)(a), group 2: 14.60 (+/- 5.21)(a), group 3: 39.20 (+/- 9.98)(c), group 4: 27.59 (+/- 6.57)(b). Different letters indicate significant differences (ANOVA; p = 0.0000).Conclusion: The application of adhesive systems before self-adhesive cements significantly increased the bond strength to dentin. In group 2, RelyX Unicem associated with the adhesive system Single Bond 2 showed significantly lower mean tensile bond strengths than group 3 (BiFix SE associated with the etch-and-rinse Solobond M adhesive system).