Bond strength of composite to dentin: effect of acid etching and laser irradiation through an uncured self-etch adhesive system

This study evaluated the effect on micro-tensile bond strength (mu-TBS) of laser irradiation of etched/unetched dentin through an uncured self-etching adhesive. Dentinal surfaces were treated with Clearfil SE Bond Adhesive (CSE) either according to the manufacturer's instructions (CSE) or without applying the primer (CSE/NP). The dentin was irradiated through the uncured adhesive, using an Nd: YAG laser at 0.75 or 1 W power settings. The adhesive was cured, composite crowns were built up, and the teeth were sectioned into beams (0.49 mm(2)) to be stressed under tension. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey statistics (alpha = 5%). Dentin of the fractured specimens and the interfaces of untested beams were observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The results showed that non-etched irradiated surfaces presented higher mu-TBS than etched and irradiated surfaces (p < 0.05). Laser irradiation alone did not lead to differences in mu-TBS (p > 0.05). SEM showed solidification globules on the surfaces of the specimens. The interfaces were similar on irradiated and non-irradiated surfaces. Laser irradiation of dentin through the uncured adhesive did not lead to higher mu-TBS when compared to the suggested manufacturer's technique. However, this treatment brought benefits when performed on unetched dentin, since bond strengths were higher when compared to etched dentin.

Influence of Nd:YAG Laser on the Bond Strength of Self-etching and Conventional Adhesive Systems to Dental Hard Tissues

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of Nd:YAG laser on the shear bond strength to enamel and dentin of total and self-etch adhesives when the laser was applied over the adhesives, before they were photopolymerized, in an attempt to create a new bonding layer by dentin-adhesive melting.Material and Methods: One-hundred twenty bovine incisors were ground to obtain flat surfaces. Specimens were divided into two substrate groups (n=60): substrate E (enamel) and substrate D (dentin). Each substrate group was subdivided into four groups (n=15), according to the surface treatment accomplished: X (Xeno III self-etching adhesive, control), XL (Xeno III + laser Nd:YAG irradiation at 140 mJ/10 Hz for 60 seconds + photopolymerization, experimental), S (acid etching + Single Bond conventional adhesive, Control), and SL (acid etching + Single Bond + laser Nd:YAG at 140 mJ/10 Hz for 60 seconds + photopolymerization, experimental). The bonding area was delimited with 3-mm-diameter adhesive tape for the bonding procedures. Cylinders of composite were fabricated on the bonding area using a Teflon matrix. The teeth were stored in water at 37 degrees C/48 h and submitted to shear testing at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min in a universal testing machine. Results were analyzed with three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA; substrate, adhesive, and treatment) and Tukey tests (alpha=0.05). ANOVA revealed significant differences for the substrate, adhesive system, and type of treatment: lased or unlased (p<0.05). The mean shear bond strength values (MPa) for the enamel groups were X=20.2 +/- 5.61, XL=23.6 +/- 4.92, S=20.8 +/- 4.55, SL=22.1 +/- 5.14 and for the dentin groups were X=14.1 +/- 7.51, XL=22.2 +/- 6.45, S=11.2 +/- 5.77, SL=15.9 +/- 3.61. For dentin, Xeno III self-etch adhesive showed significantly higher shear bond strength compared with Single Bond total-etch adhesive; Nd:YAG laser irradiation showed significantly higher shear bond strength compared with control (unlased).Conclusion: Nd:YAG laser application prior to photopolymerization of adhesive systems significantly increased the bond strength to dentin.

Microshear Bond Strength of Self-etching Bonding Systems to Ultrasound Diamond Bur-prepared Dentin

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of dentin abrasion on the microshear bond strength of two self-etching adhesive systems, using either an ultrasound diamond bur or a high-speed diamond bur.Materials and Methods: Twenty noncarious human third molars were sectioned mesiodistally into halves. The enamel was ground to expose a flat dentin surface on both sections. The dentinal surfaces were randomly assigned to two groups, depending on the method of smear layer preparation: ultrasound diamond bur (UB) or conventional diamond bur (CB). The prepared dentin surfaces received one of two self-etching systems: Clearfil SE Bond (CF) and One-Up Bond F (OB). A composite cylinder with a 0.95-mm diameter was bonded to each specimen and the microshear bond test was performed. The results were expressed in MPa and were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (alpha = 0.05).Results: There was no significant difference in dentin bond strength when comparing the conventional and ultrasonic abrasion methods. When the adhesive systems were compared, Clearfil SE Bond achieved higher bond strength means than did One-Up Bond F.Conclusion: The dentin surface preparation method did not influence the microshear bond strength and the Clearfil SE Bond adhesive system, independent of bur type used, Clearfil SE Bond showed higher bond strengths than did the One-Up Bond F adhesive system.

BOND STRENGTH DURABILITY of SELF-ETCHING ADHESIVES and RESIN CEMENTS TO DENTIN

Objectives: To evaluate the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) of one-(Xeno III, Dentsply) and two-step (Tyrian-One Step Plus, Bisco) self-etching adhesive systems bonded to dentin and cemented to chemically cured (C&B Metabond) or light-cured paste of a dual-cure resin cement (Variolink II, Ivoclar) within a short (24 h) and long period of evaluation (90 days). Material and Methods: Forty recently extracted human molars had their roots removed and their occlusal dentin exposed and ground wet with 600-grit SiC paper. After application of one of the adhesives, the resin cement was applied to the bonded surface and a composite resin block was incrementally built up to a height of 5 mm (n = 10). The restored teeth were stored in distilled water at 37 C for 7 days. The teeth were then cut along two axes (x and y), producing beam-shaped specimens with 0.8 mm(2) cross-sectional area, which were subjected to mu TBS testing at a crosshead speed of 0.05 mm/min and stressed to failure after 24 h or 90 days of storage in water. The mu TBS data in MPa were subjected to three-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test (alpha = 0.05). Results: The interaction effect for all three factors was statistically significant (three-way ANOVA, p < 0.001). All eight experimental means (MPa) were compared by the Tukey's test (p < 0.05) and the following results were obtained: Tyrian-One Step Plus /C&B/24 h (22.4 +/- 7.3); Tyrian-One Step Plus /Variolink II/24 h (39.4 +/- 11.6); Xeno III/C&B/24 h (40.3 +/- 12.9); Xeno III/Variolink II/24 h (25.8 +/- 10.5); Tyrian-One Step Plus / C&B/90 d (22.1 +/- 12.8) Tyrian-One Step Plus/VariolinkII/90 d (24.2 +/- 14.2); Xeno III/C&B/90 d (27.0 +/- 13.5); Xeno III/Variolink II/90 d (33.0 +/- 8.9). Conclusions: Xeno III/Variolink II was the luting agent/adhesive combination that provided the most promising bond strength after 90 days of storage in water.

Resin tag length of one-step and self-etching adhesives bonded to unground enamel

Length of resin tags yielded by utilization of an one-step conventional adhesive system and self-etching adhesive system on unground enamel was observed. In study Groups I and III, the enamel surface was etched for 60 seconds with 35% phosphoric acid gel and adhesive systems PQ1 (Ultradent Products, Inc) and Adper Prompt L Pop (3M/ESPE) were applied. Adper Prompt L Pop (3M/ESPE) was also applied in Group II in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. After application of these adhesive systems to dental enamel, specimens were prepared for light microscopy analysis to ascertain degree of penetration (x400). The results were submitted to an analysis of variance at the 5% level; whenever there was significance, the Tukey test was applied at the 5% level. It was found that acid etching prior to application of conventional and self-etching adhesive materials provided higher penetration of the adhesive into the unground enamel surface compared to that achieved solely by application of self-etching adhesive.

Can previous acid etching increase the bond strength of a self-etching primer adhesive to enamel?

Because a greater research effort has been directed to analyzing the adhesive effectiveness of self etch primers to dentin, the aim of this study was to evaluate, by microtensile testing, the bond strength to enamel of a composite resin combined with a conventional adhesive system or with a self-etching primer adhesive, used according to its original prescription or used with previous acid etching. Thirty bovine teeth were divided into 3 groups with 10 teeth each (n= 10). In one of the groups, a self-etching primer (Clearfil SE Bond - Kuraray) was applied in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and, in the other, it was applied after previous acid etching. In the third group, a conventional adhesive system (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus - 3M-ESPE) was applied in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The results obtained by analysis of variance revealed significant differences between the adhesive systems (F = 22.31). The self-etching primer (Clearfil SE Bond) presented lower enamel bond strength values than the conventional adhesive system (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus) (m = 39.70 ± 7.07 MPa) both when used according to the original prescription (m = 27.81 ± 2.64 MPa) and with previous acid etching (m = 25.08 ± 4.92 MPa).

Microtensile Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts Cemented with Self-adhesive and Self-etching Resin Cements

Purpose: To evaluate the bond strength of glass fiber posts to intraradicular dentin when cemented with self-etching and self-adhesive resin cements. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight single-rooted human teeth were decoronated, endodontically treated, post-space prepared and divided into 8 groups (n = 6). The glass fiber posts used were: Exacto (EA) (Angelus) and everStick (ES) (StichTeck), which were cemented with two self-adhesive resin cements: BisCem (BIS) (Bisco) and Rely-X Unicem (UNI) (3M/ESPE), and two self-etching resin cements: Esthetic Cementing System NAC100 (NAC) (Kuraray) and Panavia-F (PAN) (Kuraray). Specimens were thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 1000 cycles and stored in water at 37 degrees C for 1 month. Four 1-mm-thick (in cross section) rods were obtained from the cervical region of the roots. 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 (mu TBS) data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey`s tests. Results: Means (and SD) of mu TBS (MPa) were: EA/PAN: 10.3 (4.1), EA/NAC: 14 (5.1) EA/BIS: 16.4 (4.8), EA/UNI: 19.8 (5.1), ES/PAN: 25.9 (6.1), ES/NAC: 29.1 (7), ES/BIS: 28.9 (6), ES/UNI: 30.5 (6.6). ANOVA indicated significant differences among the groups (p < 0.001). Mean mu TBS values obtained with ES post were significantly higher than those obtained with EA (p < 0.001). For EA, Tukey`s test indicated that higher mu TBS means were obtained with the self-adhesive resin cements (BIS and UNI), which were statistically significantly different (p < 0.05) from values obtained with the self-etching resin cements (PAN and NAC). Different cements had no significant effects on the bond strength values of ES post (p > 0.05). mu TBS values obtained with ES post were significantly higher than those obtained with EA post irrespective of the resin cement used. Conclusion: everStick posts resulted in the highest mean mu TBS values with all cements. Self-adhesive cements performed well in terms of bond strength.

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.

Tensile bond strength of self-etching versus total-etching adhesive systems under different dentinal substrate conditions

The use of acid etchants to produce surface demineralization and collagen network exposure, allowing adhesive monomers interdiffusion and consequently the formation of a hybrid layer, has been considered the most efficient mechanism of dentin bonding. The aim of this study was to compare the tensile bond strength to dentin of three adhesive systems, two self-etching ones (Clearfil SE Bond - CSEB and One Up Bond F - OUBF) and one total-etching one (Single Bond - SB), under three dentinal substrate conditions (wet, dry and re-wet). Ninety human, freshly extracted third molars were sectioned at the occlusal surface to remove enamel and to form a flat dentin wall. The specimens were restored with composite resin (Filtek Z250) and submitted to tensile bond strength testing (TBS) in an MTS 810. The data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p = 0.05). Wet dentin presented the highest TBS values for SB and CSEB. Dry dentin and re-wet produced significantly lower TBS values when using SB. OUBF was not affected by the different conditions of the dentin substrate, producing similar TBS values regardless of the surface pretreatments.

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.

Microshear Bond Strength of Self-etching Systems Associated with a Hydrophobic Resin Layer

Purpose: To evaluate in vitro the microshear bond strength of adhesive systems applied to dentin according to manufacturers` instructions, associated or not with a hydrophobic layer of unfilled resin. Materials and Methods: Six self-etching adhesives (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Medical; AdheSE, lvoclar Vivadent; Xeno III, Dentsply; I Bond, Heraeus-Kulzer; Bond Force, Tokuyama; Futurabond DC, Voco) were tested. The labial dentin of sixty bovine incisors was exposed, and the teeth were divided into two groups according to the application or not of an extra hydrophobic resin layer (Scotchbond Multi Purpose Plus, bottle 3). Six composite cylinders (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE) were built up on each treated surface. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 C for 24 h and then subjected to the microshear bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Microshear bond strength values were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey`s post-hoc test. Failure mode was determined using a stereomicroscope under 20X magnification. Results: The application of the hydrophobic resin layer did not affect bond strength, except for AdheSE. However, the bond strengths with the hydrophobic layer were similar among the six tested systems (Clearfil: 17.1 +/- 7.9; AdheSE: 14.5 +/- 7.1; Xeno III: 12.8 +/- 7.7; I Bond: 9.5 +/- 5.8; Bond Force: 17.5 +/- 4.1; Futurabond: 7.7 +/- 2.3). When used as recommended by the manufacturers, Bond Force presented statistically higher bond strength than AdheSE and I Bond (p < 0.05) (Clearfil 10.4 +/- 4.9; AdheSE 1.6 +/- 1.6; Xeno III: 9.0 +/- 3.8; I Bond: 3.0 +/- 1.5; Bond Force: 14 +/- 3.9; Futurabond: 8.8 +/- 3.8). Failure mode was predominantly adhesive. Conclusion: The bond strength of the self-etching systems tested was not significantly affected by the application of a hydrophobic layer, but a significant improvement was observed in AdheSE.

Effects of Surface Hydration State and Application Method on the Bond Strength of Self-etching Adhesives to Cut Enamel

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of surface hydration state and application method on the microtensile bond strength of one-step self-etching adhesives systems to cut enamel.Materials and Methods: One hundred ninety-five bovine teeth were used. The enamel on the buccal side was flattened with 600-grit SiC paper. For the control group, 15 teeth received Adper Single Bond 2, applied according to manufacturer's recommendations. The other specimens were divided into three groups according to the adhesive system used: Futura Bond M (FM; Voco), Clearfil S-3 Bond (CS; Kuraray), and Optibond All in One (OA; Kerr). For each group, two hydration states were tested: D: blown dry with air; W: the excess of water was removed with absorbent paper. Two application methods were tested: P (passive): the adhesive was simply left on the surface; A (active): the adhesive was rubbed with an applicator point. A coat of Grandio composite resin (Voco) was applied on the surface. The teeth were sectioned to obtain enamel-resin sticks (1 x 1 mm), which underwent microtensile bond testing. The data in MPa were submitted to a three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha = 5%).Results: The ANOVA showed significant differences for application method and the type of adhesive, but not for hydration state. For the application method, the results of Tukey's test were: P: 31.46 (+/-7.09)a; A: 34.04 (+/-7.19)b. For the type of adhesive, the results were: OA: 31.29 (+/-7.05)a; CS: 32.28 (+/-7.14)a; FM: 34.68 (+/-7.17)b; different lower-case letters indicate statistically significant differences.Conclusion: Active application improved the bond strength to cut enamel. The adhesive Futurabond M showed the highest bond strength to cut enamel.

Analysis of the effects of thermal cycling on the microtensile shear bond strength of a self-etching and a conventional pit and fissure sealants to dental enamel

Objective: To analyze the effects of thermal cycling on the microtensile shear bond strength of a self-etching and a conventional pit and fissure sealants to dental enamel. Material and Method: Twenty-four healthy human molars extracted for orthodontic reasons, were sectioned in the mesio-distal direction and divided into two groups (n=24) according to the sealant to be applied: GI - conventional sealant Climpro (3M/ESPE) and GII - self-etching sealant Enamel Loc (Premier Dental). The sealants were applied on flattened enamel in matrixes 1 mm in diameter, in accordance with the manufacturers' recommendations. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. After this, half the samples of both groups were submitted to 500 thermal cycles in 30s baths at temperatures between 5 and 55°C. Forty-eight hours after the samples were made, the microtensile shear test was performed in an Instron 4411 test machine, with a stainless steel wire with a cylindrical cross section of 0.2mm in diameter at a constant speed of 0.5mm/s. The bond strength values were submitted to ANOVA for 2 factors and the fracture patterns were examined under an optical microscope at 65X magnification. Results: Thermal cycling did not influence the bond strength of the two sealants. The conventional sealant Climpro presented a statistically higher microtensile shear bond strength (11.72MPa, 11.34MPa with and without cycling, respectively) than the self-etching sealant Enamel Loc (5.92MPa, 5.02MPa with and without cycling, respectively). Fracture pattern analysis showed the occurrence of 100% of adhesive failures for Enamel Loc, while the conventional sealant Climpro presented 95% of adhesive failures and 5% of mixed failures. Conclusion: The conventional sealant presented higher microtensile shear bond strength to dental enamel in comparison with the self-etching sealant. Thermal cycling did not affect the bond strength of the sealants used in this study. © 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Clinical evaluation of postoperative sensitivity using self-etching adhesives containing glutaraldehyde

The present clinical study aimed to assess the postoperative sensitivity (POS) after 48 hours and seven days in occlusal restorations bonded with three different adhesive systems, two of them containing glutaraldehyde. The restorative procedures were performed using the three-step etch-and-rinse Adper SBMP-Plus adhesive (SBMP), the two-step etch-and-rinse Gluma Comfort One Bond + Desensitizer adhesive (GC+D) and the all-in-one self-etching/priming I Bond (IB) adhesive, which also has glutaraldehyde in its formula. All cavities were restored with Filtek Supreme nanoparticle composite resin. After 48 hours and seven days the patients were recalled and the postoperative sensitivity evaluated. The data analyzed by non-parametric Friedman test showed no significant differences in POS among the three tested groups after 48 hours and seven days.