Microtensile Bond Strength Of Methacrylate And Silorane Resins To Enamel And Dentin.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of two substrates (enamel and dentin) considering two study factors: type of composite resin [methacrylate-based (Filtek Supreme) or silorane-based (Filtek LS)] and aging time (24 h or 3 months). Twenty human molars were selected and divided into 2 groups (n=10) considering two dental substrates, enamel or dentin. The enamel and dentin of each tooth was divided into two halves separated by a glass plate. Each tooth was restored using both tested composite resins following the manufacturer's instructions. The samples were sectioned, producing 4 sticks for each composite resin. Half of them were tested after 24 h and half after 3 months. µTBS testing was carried out at 0.05 mm/s. Data were analyzed by three-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD tests at α=0.05. Significant differences between composite resins and substrates were found (p<0.05), but no statistically significant difference was found for aging time and interactions among study factors. The methacrylate-based resin showed higher µTBS than the silorane-based resin. The µTBS for enamel was significantly higher than for dentin, irrespective of the composite resin and storage time. Three months of storage was not sufficient time to cause degradation of the bonding interaction of either of the composite resins to enamel and dentin.

Effect Of Composite Containing An Iodonium Salt On The Bond Strength Of Brackets To Bovine Enamel.

This study investigated the effect of the incorporation of an iodonium salt in experimental composites, on the bond strength of metallic brackets bonded to bovine teeth. Two hundred and seventy bovine teeth were embedded in self-curing acrylic resin and divided into 18 groups (n=15), according to the experimental composite with an iodonium salt at molar concentrations 0 (control), 0.5, or 1%; the light-activation times (8, 20 and 40 s); and the storage times (10 min or 24 h). Metallic brackets were fixed on the tooth surface using experimental composites. Photoactivation was performed with a quartz-tungsten-halogen light-curing unit curing unit for 8, 20 and 40 s. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 10 min or 24 h and submitted to bond strength test at 0.5 mm/min. The data were subjected to three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was used to classify the failure modes. The shear bond strengths (MPa) at 10 min for light-activation times of 8, 20 and 40 s were: G1 - 4.6, 6.9 and 7.1; G2 - 8.1, 9.2 and 9.9; G3 - 9.1, 10.4 and 10.7; and at 24 h were: G1 - 10.9, 11.1 and 11.7; G2 - 11.8, 12.7 and 14.2; G3 - 12.1, 14.4 and 15.8. There was a predominance of ARI score 3 for groups with 10 min storage time, and ARI score 2 for groups with 24 h storage time. In conclusion, the addition of iodonium salt (C05 and C1) to the experimental composite may increase the bond strength of brackets to bovine enamel using reduced light exposure times.

Dentin Bond Strength Of A Fluoride-releasing Adhesive System Submitted To Ph-cycling.

To evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of a fluoride-containing adhesive system submitted to a pH-cycling and storage time regimen for primary outcomes. As secondary outcomes the fluoride released amount was evaluated. Twelve dentin surfaces from sound third molar were divided into 2 groups according to adhesive systems: Clearfil SE Protect (PB) and Clearfil SE Bond (SE). Sticks obtained (1.0 mm2) from teeth were randomly divided into 3 subgroups according to storage regimen model: immediate (24h); 5-month deionized water (W); and pH-cycling model (C). All sticks were tested for µTBS in a universal testing machine. Fluoride concentration was obtained from 1-4 days and 30-day in W and 1-4 days in demineralization (DE)/remineralization (RE) solutions from C, using a fluoride-specific electrode. µTBS and fluoride released data were, respectively, submitted to ANOVA in a split plot design and Tukey, and Friedman' tests (a=0.05). There was no significant interaction between adhesive system and storage regimen for µTBS. W showed the lowest µTBS values. There was no significant difference between 24 h and C models for µTBS. There was no significant difference between adhesive systems. Failure mode was predominantly cohesive within composite for the 24 h and W, for the C group it was mixed for SE and cohesive within composite for PB adhesive system. Fluoride concentrations in the DE/RE solutions were less than 0.03125 ppm and not detected in W. In conclusion, the fluoride-containing adhesive system performed similarly to the regular one. Hydrolytic degradation is the main problem with both adhesive systems, regardless of fluoride contents.

Dentine Bond Strength And Antimicrobial Activity Evaluation Of Adhesive Systems.

This study evaluated the dentine bond strength (BS) and the antibacterial activity (AA) of six adhesives against strict anaerobic and facultative bacteria. Three adhesives containing antibacterial components (Gluma 2Bond (glutaraldehyde)/G2B, Clearfil SE Protect (MDPB)/CSP and Peak Universal Bond (PUB)/chlorhexidine) and the same adhesive versions without antibacterial agents (Gluma Comfort Bond/GCB, Clearfil SE Bond/CSB and Peak LC Bond/PLB) were tested. The AA of adhesives and control groups was evaluated by direct contact method against four strict anaerobic and four facultative bacteria. After incubation, according to the appropriate periods of time for each microorganism, the time to kill microorganisms was measured. For BS, the adhesives were applied according to manufacturers' recommendations and teeth restored with composite. Teeth (n=10) were sectioned to obtain bonded beams specimens, which were tested after artificial saliva storage for one week and one year. BS data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey test. Saliva storage for one year reduces the BS only for GCB. In general G2B and GCB required at least 24h for killing microorganisms. PUB and PLB killed only strict anaerobic microorganisms after 24h. For CSP the average time to eliminate the Streptococcus mutans and strict anaerobic oral pathogens was 30min. CSB showed no AA against facultative bacteria, but had AA against some strict anaerobic microorganisms. Storage time had no effect on the BS for most of the adhesives. The time required to kill bacteria depended on the type of adhesive and never was less than 10min. Most of the adhesives showed stable bond strength after one year and the Clearfil SE Protect may be a good alternative in restorative procedures performed on dentine, considering its adequate bond strength and better antibacterial activity.