Bonding agent underneath sealant: shear bond strength to oil-contaminated

This study evaluated in vitro the shear bond strength of a resin-based pit-and-fissure sealant (Fluroshield - F) associated with either an ethanol-based (Adper Single Bond 2 - SB) or an acetone-based (Prime & Bond - PB) adhesive system under conditions of oil contamination. Mesial and distal enamel surfaces from 30 sound third molars were randomly assigned to 2 groups (n=30): I - no oil contamination; II - oil contamination. Contamination (0.25 mL during 10 s) was performed after 37% phosphoric acid etching with an air/oil spray. The specimens were randomly assigned to subgroups, according to the bonding protocol adopted: subgroup A - F was applied to enamel without an intermediate bonding agent layer; In subgroups B and C, SB and PB, respectively, were applied, light-cured, and then F was applied and light-cured. Shear bond strength was tested at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min in a universal testing machine. Means (± SD) in MPa were: IA-11.28 (±1.84); IIA-12.02 (±1.15); IB-9.73 (±2.38); IIB-9.62 (±2.29); IC-28.30 (±1.63); and IIC-25.50 (±1.91). It may be concluded that the oil contamination affected negatively the sealant bonding to enamel and the acetone-based adhesive system (PB) layer applied underneath the sealant was able to prevent its deleterious effects to adhesion.

Bond strength of a pit-and-fissure sealant associated to etch-and-rinse and self-etching adhesive systems to saliva-contaminated enamel: individual vs. simultaneous light curing

This study evaluated in vitro the shear bond strength (SBS) of a resin-based pit-and-fissure sealant [Fluroshield (F), Dentsply/Caulk] associated with either an etch-and-rinse [Adper Single Bond 2 (SB), 3M/ESPE] or a self-etching adhesive system [Clearfil S3 Bond (S3), Kuraray Co., Ltd.] to saliva-contaminated enamel, comparing two curing protocols: individual light curing of the adhesive system and the sealant or simultaneous curing of both materials. Mesial and distal enamel surfaces from 45 sound third molars were randomly assigned to 6 groups (n=15), according to the bonding technique: I - F was applied to 37% phosphoric acid etched enamel. The other groups were contaminated with fresh human saliva (0.01 mL; 10 s) after acid etching: II - SB and F were light cured separately; III - SB and F were light cured together; IV - S3 and F were light cured separately; V - S3 and F were light cured simultaneously; VI - F was applied to saliva-contaminated, acid-etched enamel without an intermediate bonding agent layer. SBS was tested to failure in a universal testing machine at 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Fisher's test (α=0.05).The debonded specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope to assess the failure modes. Three representative specimens from each group were observed under scanning electron microscopy for a qualitative analysis. Mean SBS in MPa were: I-12.28 (±4.29); II-8.57 (±3.19); III-7.97 (±2.16); IV-12.56 (±3.11); V-11.45 (±3.77); and VI-7.47 (±1.99). In conclusion, individual or simultaneous curing of the intermediate bonding agent layer and the resin sealant did not seem to affect bond strength to saliva-contaminated enamel. S3/F presented significantly higher SBS than the that of the groups treated with SB etch-and-rinse adhesive system and similar SBS to that of the control group, in which the sealant was applied under ideal dry, noncontaminated conditions.

Allelopathic potential of bark and leaves of Esenbeckia leiocarpa Engl. (Rutaceae)

We investigated the inhibitory potential of aqueous extracts of bark and leaves of Esenbeckia leiocarpa Engl. on lettuce germination and early seedling growth. We compared the effects of four concentrations (100, 75, 50 and 25%) of each extract to water and polyethylene glycol (PEG 6000) solution controls for four replicates of 50 seeds tor germination and four replicates of ten seedlings for seedling growth. The inhibitory effects of E. leiocarpa extracts on the percentage of germination and on the germination speed seemed to be inure than simply an osmotic effect, except for the percentage of seeds germinated in bark extracts. When compared to water control. both bark and leaf extracts delayed germination, and leaf extracts also affected the percentage of germinated seeds. Leaf ex tracts of all concentrations strongly inhibited the development of seedlings and caused them some degree of abnormality; bark extracts also caused abnormalities and reduced seedling growth. Root development was more sensitive to the extracts than hypocotyl growth. The negative effects of leaf extracts on germination and seedling growth were more pronounced than those of bark extracts, and the overall effects of both extracts were positively correlated with extract concentrations.