Early and 24-hour bond strength and degree of conversion of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives

Purpose: To evaluate early and 24-hour microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) and the degree of conversion (DC) of one representative adhesive system from each of the four current bonding approaches. Methods: 40 human molars were sectioned occluso-gingivally into two halves. Resin composite was bonded incrementally to flat, mid-coronal dentin, using the adhesives Adper Scotchbond MP (MP); Adper Scotchbond 2 (SB); Clearfil SE Bond (SE); and Adper Prompt L-Pop (LP) according to the respective manufacturer`s instructions (n= 10). One half was immediately sectioned into sticks and subjected to mu TBS test. As the sectioning process took approximately 1 hour, the results were designated as 1-hour bond strengths. The other half was stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours before being sectioned and tested. The DC of these systems was measured using Fourier Transform-Raman spectroscopy in three periods: immediately, 1 and 24 hours after polymerization. Data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey`s tests. Results: There were no significant differences between the 1-hour and 24-hour bond strengths (P> 0.05), or among the DC measured immediately, 1 hour and 24 hours after polymerization (P> 0.05). However, significant differences were observed among adhesives (P< 0.05). mu TBS values obtained, in MPa (1 hour/24 hour), were: SB (48.6 + 1.3/48.4 + 3.5) = SE (51.9 + 4.7/53.3 +/- 2.9) > MP (35.3 +/- 10.9/38.6 + 6.7) > LP (25.5 + 1.1/26.0 + 1.5). The DC, in percentage (immediately/1 hour/24 hour), were: SE (81/82/87) > MP (79/77/81) > SB (60/63/65) > LP (39/37/42).

Adhesive Temperature: Effects on Adhesive Properties and Resin-Dentin Bond Strength

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of adhesive temperature on the resin-dentin bond strength (mu TBS), nanoleakage (NL), adhesive layer thickness (AL), and degree of conversion (DC) of ethanol/water- (SB) and acetone-based (PB) etch-and-rinse adhesive systems. Methods: The bottles of the two adhesives were kept at each temperature (5 degrees C, 20 degrees C, 37 degrees C, and 50 degrees C) for 2 hours before application to demineralized dentin surfaces of 40 molars. Specimens were prepared for mu TBS testing. Bonded sticks (0.8 mm(2)) were tested under tension (0.5 mm/min). Three bonded sticks from each tooth were immersed in silver nitrate and analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. The DC of the adhesives was evaluated by Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy. Results: Lower mu TBS was observed for PB at 50 degrees C. For SB, the mu TBS values were similar for all temperatures. DC was higher at 50 degrees C for PB. Higher NL and thicker AL were observed for both adhesives in the 5 degrees C and 20 degrees C groups compared to the 37 degrees C and 50 degrees C groups. The higher temperatures (37 degrees C or 50 degrees C) reduced the number of pores within the adhesive layer of both adhesive systems. Conclusions: It could be useful to use an ethanol/water-based adhesive at 37 degrees C or 50 degrees C and an acetone-based adhesive at 37 degrees C to improve adhesive performance.

Influence of glutaraldehyde priming on bond strength of an experimental adhesive system applied to wet and dry dentine

Objectives: This study tested the following null hypotheses: (1) there is no difference in resin-dentine bond strength when an experimental glutaraldehyde primer solution is added prior to bonding procedures and (2) there is no difference in resin-dentine bond strength when experimental glutaraldehyde/adhesive system is applied under dry or wet demineralized dentine conditions. Methods: Extracted human maxillary third molars were selected. Flat, mid-coronal dentine was exposed for bonding and four groups were formed. Two groups were designated for the dry and two for the wet dentine technique: DRY: (1) Group GD: acid etching + glutaraldehyde primer (primer A) + HEMA/ethanol primer (primer B)-under dried dentine + unfilled resin; (2) Group D: the same as GD, except for primer A application; WET: (3) Group GW: the same as GD, but primer B was applied under wet dentine condition; (4) Group W: the same as GW, except for primer A application. The bonding resin was light-cured and a resin core was built up on the adhesive layer. Teeth were then prepared for microtensile bond testing to evaluate bond strength. The data obtained were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey`s test (alpha = 0.05). Results: Glutaraldehyde primer application significantly improved resin-dentine bond strength. No significant difference was observed when the same experimental adhesive system was applied under either dry or wet dentine conditions. These results allow the first null hypothesis to be rejected and the second to be accepted. Conclusion: Glutaraldehyde may affect demineralized dentine properties leading to improved resin bonding to wet and dry substrates. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Influence of differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on adhesive layer thickness and bond strength

Statement of the Problem: Adhesive systems can spread differently onto a substrate and, consequently, influence bonding. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on adhesive layer thickness and microtensile bond strength (MTBS). Materials and Methods: Twenty-four molars were sectioned mesiodistally to expose flat buccal and lingual halves. Standardized drop volumes of adhesive systems (Single Bond [SB] and Prime & Bond 2.1 [PB2.1]) were applied to dentin according to the manufacturer`s instructions. Teeth halves were randomly divided into groups: 1A-SB/parallel to gravity; 1B-SB/perpendicular to gravity; 2A-PB2.1/parallel to gravity; and 2B-PB2.1/perpendicular to gravity. The bonded assemblies were stored in 37 degrees C distilled water for 24 hours and then sectioned to obtain dentin sticks (0.8 mm(2)). The adhesive layer thickness was determined in a light microscope (x200), and after 48 hours the specimens were subjected to MTBS test. Data were analyzed by one-way and two-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests. Results: Mean values (MPa +/- SD) of MTBS were: 39.1 +/- 12.9 (1A); 32.9 +/- 12.4 (1B); 52.9 +/- 15.2 (2A); and 52.3 +/- 16.5 (2B). The adhesive systems` thicknesses (mu m +/- SD) were: 11.2 +/- 2.9 (1A); 18.1 +/- 7.3 (1B); 4.2 +/- 1.8 (2A); and 3.9 +/- 1.3 (2B). No correlation between bond strength and adhesive layer thickness for both SB and PB2.1 (r = -0.224, p = 0.112 and r = 0.099, p = 0.491, respectively) was observed. Conclusions: The differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on the adhesive layer thickness are material-dependent. These variables do not influence the adhesive systems` bond strength to dentin. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Adhesive systems have different viscosities and spread differently onto a substrate, influencing the bond strength and also the adhesive layer thickness. Adhesive thickness does not influence dentin bond strength, but it may impair adequate solvent evaporation, polymer conversion, and may also determine water sorption and adhesive degradation over time. In the literature, many studies have shown that the adhesive layer is a permeable membrane and can fail over timebecause ofits continuous plasticizing and degradation when in contact with water. Therefore, avoiding thick adhesive layers may minimize these problems and provide long-term success for adhesive restorations.

Enamel Wetness Effects on Bond Strength Using Different Adhesive Systems

Objective: To evaluate, through the application of different dentin bonding systems, the influence of wetness on shear bond strength in enamel. Methods: This study evaluated three etch-and-rinse adhesive systems (Scotchbond MP [used with and without primer]; Singlebond; and Prime&Bond 2.1) and two self-etching adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond; and Xeno IV). Flat bovine enamel surfaces were either air-dried for 30 seconds or blotted with absorbent paper after acid-etching for the conventional bonding agents or before the application of self-etching bonding agents. The resin composite EsthetX was bonded to flat surfaces that had been treated with one of the adhesives, following the manufacturer`s instructions. After being stored in water at 37 degrees C for one week, bonded specimens were broken in shear. Data were evaluated with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (alpha=0.05). For comparing each condition individually, regardless of the adhesive or wetness condition, a one-way ANOVA and a Student-Newman-Keuls test (alpha=0.05) were applied. Results: The two-way ANOVA showed significant differences among adhesive systems. An interaction effect was also observed (p < 0.05), but wetness did not influence shear bond strength (p=0.98). The one-way ANOVA showed that the all-in-one adhesive was the only material influenced by the presence of water at the enamel`s surface. Conclusion: The all-in-one adhesive behaved differently depending on whether the enamel surface was dry or wet.

Effect of 2% Chlorhexidine Digluconate on the Bond Strength to Normal Versus Caries-affected Dentin

This study evaluated the effect of 2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) used as a therapeutic primer on the long-term bond strengths of two etch-and-rinse adhesives to normal (ND) and caries-affected (CAD) dentin. Forty extracted human molars with coronal carious lesions, surrounded by normal dentin, were selected for this study. The flat surfaces of two types of dentin (ND and CAD) were prepared with a water-cooled high-speed diamond disc, then acidetched, rinsed and air-dried. In the control groups, the dentin was re-hydrated with distilled water, blot-dried and bonded with a three-step (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose-MP) or two-step (Single Bond 2-SB) etch-and-rinse adhesive. In the experimental groups, the dentin was rehydrated with 2% CHX (60 seconds), blot-dried and bonded with the same adhesives. Resin composite build-ups were made. The specimens were prepared for microtensile bond testing in accordance with the non-trimming technique, then tested either immediately or after six-months storage in artificial saliva. The data were analyzed by ANOVA/Bonferroni tests (alpha=0.05). CHX did not affect the immediate bond strength to ND or CAD (p>0.05). CHX treatment significantly lowered the loss of bond strength after six months as seen in the control bonds for ND (p<0.05), but it did not alter the bond strength of CAD (p>0.05). The application of NIP on CHX-treated ND or CAD produced bonds that did not change over six months of storage.

Microtensile vs Microshear Bond Strength of All-in-One Adhesives to Unground Enamel

Purpose To determine the bond strength to unground enamel of all in one adhesives in comparison with an etch and rinse system and to compare the reliability of microtensile and microshear methods in providing such measurements Materials and Methods The bonding procedure was performed on enamel of 64 extracted molars The tested all in one adhesives were Bond Force (Tokuyama), AdheSE One (Ivoclar Vivadent) and Xeno V (Dentsply) Prime&Bond NT (Dentsply) served as control Microtensile specimens were obtained from 4 teeth per group Twelve teeth per group were used for microshear testing Microtensile specimens that failed prior to testing were included in statistical calculations, they were assigned the lowest value measured in the respective group Failure modes were observed under light microscope and classified (cohesive within substrates, adhesive mixed) Statistically significant differences in bond strength were assessed among the adhesives within each testing method and between microshear and microtensile data for each adhesive Failure mode distributions were compared using the chi square test Results All in-one adhesives had similar microshear and microtensile bond strengths In both testing methods, the etch and rinse system achieved the strongest bond For all adhesives significantly higher bond strengths were measured with the microshear test In microtensile testing specimens bonded with the etch and rinse adhesive exhibited a significantly different distribution of failure modes The coefficients of variation were extremely high for microtensile bond strength data, particularly of all in one adhesives Conclusion The adhesive potential to intact enamel of recently introduced all in-one adhesives was inferior to that of an etch and rinse system When testing bond strength to enamel of all in one adhesives, microshear testing may be a more accurate method than microtensile

Shear Bond Strength of A Sealant to Contaminated-Enamel Surface: Influence of Erbium : Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet Laser Pretreatment

Salivary contamination is one of the factors that can disturb the sealing process and interfere in the longevity of pit and fissure sealants. Erbium : yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er : YAG) laser could influence the bond strength of enamel and increase the acid resistance. To evaluate the influence of Er : YAG laser on the shear bond strength of a sealant to a salivary contaminated enamel surface. Twenty-four third molars had the roots sectioned 2 mm coronal to the cementoenamel junction. The crowns were mesiodistally sectioned providing 48 halves that were embedded in polyester resin. Enamel was flattened and a 2-mm diameter bonding area was demarcated. Specimens were randomly assigned to two groups according to the superficial pretreatment-37% phosphoric acid (A) and Er : YAG laser (80 mJ/2 Hz) + phosphoric acid (L), which were subdivided into two groups (N = 12), without salivary contamination (C) and with salivary contamination (SC). To contaminate the specimens, 0.25 mL of human fresh saliva was applied for 20 seconds and then dried. Fluroshield sealant was applied in all specimens. After storage, shear bond strength of samples were tested in a universal testing machine. Means in MPa were: AC-14.61 (+/- 2.52); ASC-6.66 (+/- 2.34); LC-11.91 (+/- 1.34); and LSC-2.22 (+/- 0.66). Statistical analysis revealed that surfaces without salivary contamination and with acid treatment had the highest mean (p < 0.05). The group with salivary contamination treated by Er : YAG laser followed by phosphoric acid application presented the lowest bond values (p < 0.05). The phosphoric acid etching under dry condition yielded better bonding performance. Er : YAG laser was not able to increase the effectiveness of conventional acid etching of enamel in the bond of sealants in both dry and wet conditions. Under the conditions of this study, the conventional etching protocol (phosphoric acid without salivary contamination) is still preferable to laser-conditioning enamel surface prior to sealant application.

Shear Bond Strength and Ultrastructural Interface Analysis of Different Adhesive Systems to Bleached Dentin

Background: It remains unclear as to whether or not dental bleaching affects the bond strength of dentin/resin restoration. Purpose: To evaluated the bond strength of adhesive systems to dentin submitted to bleaching with 38% hydrogen peroxide (HP) activated by LED-laser and to assess the adhesive/dentin interfaces by means of SEM. Study design: Sixty fragments of dentin (25 mm(2)) were included and divided into two groups: bleached and unbleached. HP was applied for 20 s and photoactivated for 45 s. Groups were subdivided according to the adhesive systems (n = 10): (1) two-steps conventional system (Adper Single Bond), (2) two-steps self-etching system (Clearfil standard error (SE) Bond), and (3) one-step self-etching system (Prompt L-Pop). The specimens received the Z250 resin and, after 24 h, were submitted to the bond strength test. Additional 30 dentin fragments (n = 5) received the same surface treatments and were prepared for SEM. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey`s test (alpha = 0.05). Results: There was significant strength reduction in bleached group when compared to unbleached group (P < 0.05). Higher bond strength was observed for Prompt. Single Bond and Clearfil presented the smallest values when used in bleached dentin. SEM analysis of the unbleached specimens revealed long tags and uniform hybrid layer for all adhesives. In bleached dentin, Single Bond provided open tubules and with few tags, Clearfil determined the absence of tags and hybrid layer, and Prompt promoted a regular hybrid layer with some tags. Conclusions: Prompt promoted higher shear bond strength, regardless of the bleaching treatment and allowed the formation of a regular and fine hybrid layer with less deep tags, when compared to Single Bond and Clearfil. Microsc. Res. Tech. 74:244-250, 2011. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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.

Effect of methyl methacrylate monomer on bond strength of denture base resin to acrylic teeth

Bond failures at the acrylic teeth and denture base resin interface are still a common clinical problem in prosthodontics. The effect of methyl methacrylate (MMA) monomer on the bond strength of three types of denture base resins (Acron MC, Lucitone 550 and QC-20) to two types of acrylic teeth (Biotone and Trilux) was evaluated. Twenty specimens were produced for each denture base resin/acrylic tooth combination and were randomly divided into control (acrylic teeth received no surface treatment) and experimental groups (MMA was applied to the surface of the acrylic teeth for 180 s) and were submitted to shear tests (1 mm/mm). Data (MPa) were analyzed using three-way ANOVA/Student`s test (alpha = 0.05). MMA increased the bond strength of Lucitone denture base resins and decreased the bond strength of QC-20. No difference was detected for the bond strength of Acron MC base resin after treatment with MMA. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Correlation between microtensile bond strength data and clinical outcome of Class V restorations.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the results of resin-dentin microtensile bond strength (µTBS) is correlated with the outcome parameters of clinical studies on non-retentive Class V restorations. METHODS: Resin-dentin µTBS data were obtained from one test center; the in vitro tests were all performed by the same operator. The µTBS testing was performed 8h after bonding and after 6 months of storing the specimens in water. Pre-test failures (PTFs) of specimens were included in the analysis, attributing them a value of 1MPa. Prospective clinical studies on cervical restorations (Class V) with an observation period of at least 18 months were searched in the literature. The clinical outcome variables were retention loss, marginal discoloration and marginal integrity. Furthermore, an index was formulated to be better able to compare the laboratory and clinical results. Estimates of adhesive effects in a linear mixed model were used to summarize the clinical performance of each adhesive between 12 and 36 months. Spearman correlations between these clinical performances and the µTBS values were calculated subsequently. RESULTS: Thirty-six clinical studies with 15 adhesive/restorative systems for which µTBS data were also available were included in the statistical analysis. In general 3-step and 2-step etch-and-rinse systems showed higher bond strength values than the 2-step/3-step self-etching systems, which, however, produced higher values than the 1-step self-etching and the resin modified glass ionomer systems. Prolonged water storage of specimens resulted in a significant decrease of the mean bond strength values in 5 adhesive systems (Wilcoxon, p<0.05). There was a significant correlation between µTBS values both after 8h and 6 months of storage and marginal discoloration (r=0.54 and r=0.67, respectively). However, the same correlation was not found between µTBS values and the retention rate, clinical index or marginal integrity. SIGNIFICANCE: As µTBS data of adhesive systems, especially after water storage for 6 months, showed a good correlation with marginal discoloration in short-term clinical Class V restorations, longitudinal clinical trials should explore whether early marginal staining is predictive for future retention loss in non-carious cervical restorations.

Bond strength of orthodontic brackets using different light and self-curing cements

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of stainless steel orthodontic brackets directly bonded to extracted human premolar teeth. Fifty teeth were randomly divided into ¿ve groups: (1) System One (chemically cured composite resin), (2) Light Bond (light-cured composite resin), (3) Vivaglass Cem (self-curing glass ionomer cement), (4) Fuji Ortho LC (light-cured glass ionomer cement) used after 37% orthophosphoric acid¿etching of enamel (5) Fuji Ortho LC without orthophosphoric acid¿etching. The brackets were placed on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each tooth, and the specimens were stored in distilled water (24 hours) at 378C and thermocycled. Teeth were mounted on acrylic block frames, and brackets were debonded using an Instron machine. Shear bond strength values at fracture (Nw)were recorded. ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison tests were performed (P , .05). Bonding failure site was recorded by stereomicroscope and analyzed by Chi-square test, selected specimens of each group were observed by scanning electron microscope. System One attained the highest bond strength. Light Bond and Fuji Ortho LC, when using an acid-etching technique, obtained bond strengths that were within the range of estimated bond strength values for successful clinical bonding. Fuji Ortho LC and Vivaglass Cem left an almost clean enamel surface after debracketing.

Effect of water contamination on the shear bond strength of five orthodontic adhesives

Objectives: To evaluate the shear bond strength and site of failure of brackets bonded to dry and wet enamel. Study design: 50 teeth were divided into ten groups of 5 teeth each (10 surfaces). In half the groups enamel was kept dry before bonding, and in the other half distilled water was applied to wet the surface after etching. The following groups were established: 1)Acid/Transbond-XT (dry/wet) XT; 2) Transbond Plus Self Etching Primer (TSEP)/Transbond-XT paste (dry/wet); 3) Concise (dry), Transbond MIP/Concise (wet), 4) FujiOrtho-LC (dry/wet); 5) SmartBond (dry/wet). Brackets were bonded to both buccal and lingual surfaces. Specimens were stored in distilled water (24 hours at 37ºC) and thermocycled. Brackets were debonded using a Universal testing machine (cross-head speed 1 mm/min). Failure sites were classified using a stereomicroscope. Results: No significant differences in bond strength were detected between the adhesives under wet and dry conditions except for Smart- Bond, whose bond strength was significantly lower under dry conditions. For all the adhesives most bond failures were of mixed site location except for Smartbond, which failed at the adhesive-bracket interface. Conclusions: Under wet conditions the bonding capacity of the adhesives tested was similar than under dry conditions, with the exception of SmartBond which improved under wet conditions

Bond strength tests of dental adhesive systems and their correlation with clinical results : a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the variability of bond strength test results of adhesive systems (AS) and to correlate the results with clinical parameters of clinical studies investigating cervical restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Regarding the clinical studies, the internal database which had previously been used for a meta-analysis on cervical restorations was updated with clinical studies published between 2008 and 2012 by searching the PubMed and SCOPUS databases. PubMed and the International Association for Dental Research abstracts online were searched for laboratory studies on microtensile, macrotensile and macroshear bond strength tests. The inclusion criteria were (1) dentin, (2) testing of at least four adhesive systems, (3) same diameter of composite and (4) 24h of water storage prior to testing. The clinical outcome variables were retention loss, marginal discoloration, detectable margins, and a clinical index comprising the three parameters by weighing them. Linear mixed models which included a random study effect were calculated for both, the laboratory and the clinical studies. The variability was assessed by calculating a ratio of variances, dividing the variance among the estimated bonding effects obtained in the linear mixed models by the sum of all variance components estimated in these models. RESULTS: Thirty-two laboratory studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria comprising 183 experiments. Of those, 86 used the microtensile test evaluating 22 adhesive systems (AS). Twenty-seven used the macrotensile test with 17 AS, and 70 used the macroshear test with 24 AS. For 28 AS the results from clinical studies were available. Microtensile and macrotensile (Spearman rho=0.66, p=0.007) were moderately correlated and also microtensile and macroshear (Spearman rho=0.51, p=0.03) but not macroshear and macrotensile (Spearman rho=0.34, p=0.22). The effect of the adhesive system was significant for microtensile and macroshear (p<0.001) but not for macrotensile. The effect of the adhesive system could explain 36% of the variability of the microtensile test, 27% of the macrotensile and 33% of the macroshear test. For the clinical trials, about 49% of the variability of retained restorations could be explained by the adhesive system. With respect to the correlation between bond strength tests and clinical parameters, only a moderate correlation between micro- and macrotensile test results and marginal discoloration was demonstrated. However, no correlation between these tests and a retention loss or marginal integrity was shown. The correlation improved when more studies were included compared to assessing only one study. SIGNIFICANCE: The high variability of bond strength test results highlights the need to establish individual acceptance levels for a given test institute. The weak correlation of bond-strength test results with clinical parameters leads to the conclusion that one should not rely solely on bond strength tests to predict the clinical performance of an adhesive system but one should conduct other laboratory tests like tests on the marginal adaptation of fillings in extracted teeth and the retention loss of restorations in non-retentive cavities after artificial aging.