905 resultados para Conventional adhesive system


Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This literature review article addresses the types and the main components of different etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems available in the market, and relates them to their function, possible chemical interactions and influence of handling characteristics. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images are presented to characterize the interface between adhesives and dentin. Adhesive systems have been recently classifed according to their adhesion approaches in etch-and-rinse, self-etch and glass ionomer. The etch-and-rinse systems require a specifc acid-etch procedure and may be performed in two or three steps. Self-etch systems employ acidic monomers that demineralize and impregnate dental substrates almost at the same time. These systems are separated in one or two steps. Some advantages and defciencies were noted for etch-and-rinse and self-etch approaches, mainly for the simplifed ones due to some chemical associations and interactions. The SEM micrographs illustrate different relationships between adhesive systems and dental structures, particularly dentin. The knowledge of composition, characteristics and mechanisms of adhesion of each adhesive system is of fundamental importance to permit the adoption of ideal bonding strategies under clinical conditions.

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

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

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Adhesive restorations have increasingly been used in dentistry, and the adhesive system application technique may determine the success of the restorative procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the application technique of two adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond and Adper Scotchbond MultiPurpose) on the bond strength and adhesive layer of composite resin restorations. Eight human third molars were selected and prepared with Class I occlusal cavities. The teeth were restored with composite using various application techniques for both adhesives, according to the following groups (n = 10): group 1 (control), systems were applied and adhesive was immediately light activated for 20 seconds without removing excesses; group 2, excess adhesive was removed with a gentle jet of air for 5 seconds; group 3, excess was removed with a dry microbrush-type device; and group 4, a gentle jet of air was applied after the microbrush and then light activation was performed. After this, the teeth were submitted to microtensile testing. For the two systems tested, no statistical differences were observed between groups 1 and 2. Groups 3 and 4 presented higher bond strength values compared with the other studied groups, allowing the conclusion that excess adhesive removal with a dry micro-brush could improve bond strength in composite restorations. Predominance of adhesive fracture and thicker adhesive layer were observed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in groups 1 and 2. For groups 3 and 4, a mixed failure pattern and thinner adhesive layer were verified. Clinicians should be aware that excess adhesive may negatively affect bond strength, whereas a thin, uniform adhesive layer appears to be favorable. (Quintessence Int 2013;44:9-15)

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the two-year clinical performance of Class III, IV, and V composite restorations using a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system (2-ERA) and three one-step self-etching adhesive systems (1-SEAs).Material and Methods: Two hundred Class III, IV, and V composite restorations were placed into 50 patients. Each patient received four composite restorations (Amaris, Voco), and these restorations were bonded with one of three 1-SEAs (Futurabond M, Voco; Clearfil S3 Bond, Kuraray; and Optibond All-in-One, Kerr) or one 2-ERA (Adper Single Bond 2/3M ESPE). The four adhesive systems were evaluated at baseline and after 24 months using the following criteria: restoration retention, marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, caries occurrence, postoperative sensitivity and preservation of tooth vitality. After two years, 162 restorations were evaluated in 41 patients. Data were analyzed using the chi(2) test (p<0.05).Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the 2-ERA and the 1-SEAs regarding the evaluated parameters (p>0.05).Conclusion: The 1-SEAs showed good clinical performance at the end of 24 months.

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the 5-year clinical performance of composite restorations of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) using a total-etch adhesive system with or without collagen removal with 10% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl).Methods: In this study randomized controlled split-mouth clinical trial, one-hundred and thirty-eight NCCL were restored into 30 patients. Each patient received at least one pair of composite restorations (Filtek A110/3M ESPE), bonded either with 2 techniques: Conventional Technique - acid etching with 37% phosphoric acid + Prime & Bond NT (Denstply DeTrey); Deproteinization Technique - acid etching with 37% phosphoric acid + 10% NaOCl for 1 min + Prime & Bond NT. The two techniques were evaluated using the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria at baseline, 18 months, 3 and 5 years. After five years, one-hundred and six restorations were evaluated in 24 patients. Data were analyzed using the Chi-Square test (p < 0.05).Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two techniques regarding the evaluated parameters (p > 0.05).Conclusion: After 5 years, the application of 10% NaOCl deproteinization on etched dentine did not affect the clinical performance of composite restorations placed in NCCL when compared to the conventional total-etch technique.Clinical significance: Clinical studies evaluating the performance of the Deproteinization Technique are scarce. In this study, this technique showed similar clinical performance at the end of 5 years when compared to a conventional total-etch technique. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of Er:YAG (L) and diamond drills (DD) on: 1) the microshear bond strength (MPa); 2) the adhesive interface of two-step (TS) – Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose and one-step (OS) adhesives – Adper EasyOne, both from 3M ESPE. Material and methods: According to the preparation condition and adhesives, the samples were divided into four groups: DD_TS (control); DD_OS; L_TS and L_OS. 60 bovine incisors were randomly divided into experimental and groups: 40 for microshear bond strength (n = 10) and 20 for the adhesive interface morphology [6 to measure the thickness of the hybrid layer (HL) and length of tags (t) by CLSM (n = 3); 12 to the adhesive interface morphology by SEM (n = 3) and 2 to illustrate the effect of the instruments on dentine by SEM (n = 1)]. To conduct the microshear bond strength test, four cylinders (0.7 mm in diameter and 1 mm in height with area of adhesion of 0.38 mm) were constructed with resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT – 3M ESPE) on each dentin surface treated by either L or DD and after adhesives application. Microshear bond strength was performed in universal testing machine (EMIC 2000) with load cell of 500 kgf and a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm / min. Adhesive interface was characterized by thickness of hybrid layer (HL) and length of tags (t) in nm, with the aid of UTHSCSA ImageTool software. Results: Microshear bond strength values were: L_TS 34.10 ± 19.07, DD_TS 24.26 ± 9.35, L_OS 33.18 ± 12.46, DD_OS 21.24 ± 13.96. Two-way ANOVA resulted in statistically significant differences only for instruments (p = 0.047). Mann-Whitney identified the instruments which determined significant differences for HL thickness and tag length (t). Concerning to the adhesive types, these differences were only observed for (t). Conclusion: It can be concluded that 1) laser Er:YAG results in higher microshear bond strength values regardless of the adhesive system (TS and OS); 2) the tags did not significant affect the microshear bond strength; 3) the adhesive interface was affected by both the instruments for cavity preparation and the type of adhesive system used.

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The advent of new adhesive systems is making techniques and clinical protocols to become faster and simpler, however it does not reduce the importance of knowledge of the properties, characteristics and interaction of dental materials with the tooth structure. Among the adhesives that have recently emerged, highlight the self-etching systems, especially the two-step selfetching, in which the acid primer is available in a separate bottle from the adhesive. These adhesives have shown good results for bond strength, microleakage and postoperative sensitivity, being an option for direct adhesive restorations in anterior teeth. This way, the present case report describes the step-by-step making of a class IV restoration in an upper right central incisor using atwo-step adhesive system, obtaining satisfactory results.

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

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

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

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

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

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

Relevância:

90.00% 90.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)