993 resultados para Adhesive systems
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
This study evaluated the cohesive strength of composite using self-etching adhesive systems (SE) in the lubrication of instruments between layers of composite. The specimens were made by using a Teflon (R) device. SE were used at the interface to lubricate the instruments: Group 1(G1) - control group, no lubricant was used; Group 2(G2) -Futurabond (R) M; Group 3(G3) - Optibond (R) All-In-One; Group 4(G4) - Clearfil (R) SE Bond; Group 5(G5) - Futurabond (R) NR; Group 6(G6) - Adper (R) SE Plus; Group 7(G7) - One Up Bond (R) F. Specimens were submitted to the tensile test to evaluate the cohesive strength. Data were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey tests. ANOVA showed a value of p = 0.00. The average means (SD): G2 = 11.33(+/-3.44) a, G3 = 15.36(+/-4.06) ab, G4 = 18.9(+/-4.72) bc, G7 = 19.62(+/-4.46) bc, G5 = 21.02(+/-5.09) bc, G6 = 23.39(+/-4.17) cd, and G1 = 28.49(+/-2.89) d. All SE decreased the cohesive strength of the composite, except for Adper (R) SE Plus.
Resumo:
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).
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Purpose: To investigate the microleakage of four hydrophilic adhesive systems: one multiple-bottles (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus); two one-bottle (Single Bond, Stae); and one self-etching (Etch & Prime 3.0). Materials and Methods: 120 bovine incisor teeth were divided into four groups (n = 30) and Class V cavities were prepared at the cemento-enamel junction. The cavities were restored with the adhesive systems and with Z100 composite. The teeth were thermocycled 1,000 times between 5 +/- 2 degreesC and 55 +/- 2 degreesC with a dwell time of 1 min, and then placed in a 2% methylene blue dye (pH 7.0) for 4 hrs, washed and sectioned vertically through the center of the restorations. The qualitative evaluation was made by three examiners who distributed pre-established scores (0-4) for each tooth using a stereomicroscope at x30 magnification. Results: In enamel margins little microleakage was observed and the Kruskal-Wallis analysis did not show differences. In dentin margins the KruskaI-Wallis and multiple comparison analyses were applied: microleakage was significantly greater with Stae (median 3) and Scotchbond MP Plus (median 4). Single Bond (median 1) and Etch & Prime 3.0 (median 2) showed the best results in dentin margins, and the statistical analysis did not demonstrate differences in microleakage among these groups.
Resumo:
Many in vivo studies have stated that the response of the dentin/pulp complex does not depend on the dental material used as the liner or pulp-capping agent. However, several in vitro studies have reported the metabolic cytotoxic effects of resin components applied to fibroblast and odontoblast cell lines. The aim of this study was to evaluate the human pulp response following direct pulp capping with current bonding agents and calcium hydroxide (CH). Sound premolars scheduled for orthodontic extraction had their pulp tissue mechanically exposed. After hemorrhage control and total acid conditioning, the experimental bonding agents, including All Bond 2, Scotchbond MP-Plus, Clearfil Liner Bond 2, and Prime & Bond 2.1 were applied on the pulp exposure site. CH saline paste was used as the control pulp-capping agent. All cavities were restored with Z-100 resin composite according to the manufacturer's instructions. Following extractions, the teeth were processed for microscopic evaluation. In the short term, the bonding agents elicited a moderate inflammatory pulp response with associated dilated and congested blood vessels adjacent to the pulp exposure site. A mild inflammatory pulp response was observed when Clearfil Liner Bond 2 or CH was applied on the pulp exposures. With time, macrophages and giant cells engulfing globules and components of all experimental bonding agents displaced into the pulp space were seen. This chronic inflammatory response did not allow complete pulp repair, which interfered with the dentin bridge formation. Pulp exposures capped with CH exhibited an initial organization of elongated pulp cells underneath the coagulation necrosis. CH stimulated early pulp repair and dentin bridging that extended into the longest period. The bonding agents evaluated in the present study cannot be recommended for pulp therapy on sound human teeth.
Resumo:
Objectives: Evaluate the cytotoxic effect of the three dental adhesive systems. Methods: The immortalized mouse odontoblast cell line (MDPC-23) was plated (30,000 cell/cm 2) in 24 well dishes, allowed to grow for 72 h, and counted under inverted light microscopy. Uncured fresh adhesives were added to culture medium to simulate effects of unset adhesive. Three adhesives systems were applied for 120 min to cells in six wells for each group: Group 1) Single Bond (3M), Group 2) Prime & Bond 2.1 (Dentsply), and Group 3) Syntac Sprint (Vivadent). In the control group, PBS was added to fresh medium. The cell number was counted again and the cell morphology was assessed under SEM. In addition, the adhesive systems were applied to circles of filter paper, light-cured for 20 s, and placed in the bottom of 24 wells (six wells for each experimental materials and control group). MDPC-23 cells were plated (30,000 cell/cm 2) in the wells and allowed to incubate for 72 h. The zone of inhibition around the filter papers was measured under inverted light microscopy; cell morphology was evaluated under SEM; and the MTT assay was performed for mitochondrial respiration. Results: The fresh adhesives exhibited more toxic (cytopathic effects) to MDPC-23 cells than polymerized adhesives on filter papers, and as compared to the control group. The cytopathic effect of the adhesive systems occurred in the inhibition zone around the filter papers, which was confirmed by the MTT assay and statistical analysis (ANOVA) combined with Fisher's PLSD test. In the control group, MDPC-23 cells were dense on the plastic substrate and were in contact with the filter paper. In the experimental groups, when acid in the adhesive systems was removed by changing the culture medium, or when the adhesives were light-cured, some cells grew in the wells in spite of the persistent cytotoxic effect. Significance: All dentin adhesive systems were cytotoxic odontoblast-like cells. Both acidity and non-acidic components of these systems were responsible for the high cytopathic effect of those dental materials. © 1999 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.