Transdentinal diffusion and cytotoxicity of self-etching adhesive systems

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

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.

Influence of Application Methods of Self-etching Adhesive Systems on Adhesive Bond Strength to Dentin

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

Influence of Methods of Application of Self-etching Adhesive Systems on Adhesive Bond Strength to Enamel

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

Clinical protocol for esthetic restoration using a self-etching adhesive

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.

Etch and rinse versus self-etching adhesives systems: Tridimensional micromechanical analysis of dentin/adhesive interface

The purpose of this study was to evaluate stress distribution in the hybrid layer produced by two adhesive systems using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA). Four FEA models (M) were developed: Mc, a representation of a dentin specimen (41 x 41 x 82 mu m) restored with composite resin, exhibiting the adhesive layer, hybrid layer (HL), resin tags, peritubular dentin, and intertubular dentin to simulate the etch-and-rinse adhesive system; Mr, similar to Mc, with lateral branches of the adhesive; Ma, similar to Mc, however without resin tags and obliterated tubule orifice, to simulate the environment for the self-etching adhesive system; Mat, similar to Ma, with tags. A numerical simulation was performed to obtain the maximum principal stress (sigma(max)). The highest sigma(max) in the HL was observed for the etch-and-rinse adhesive system. The lateral branches increased the sigma(max) in the HL. The resin tags had a little influence on stress distribution with the self-etching system. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Influence of human dentine on the antibacterial activity of self-etching adhesive systems against cariogenic bacteria

Objectives: The incorporation of antibacterial agents into adhesive systems has been proposed to eliminate residual bacteria from dentine. This study used the agar diffusion method to evaluate the antibacterial activity of Clearfil Protect Bond (CPB), Clearfil SE Bond (CSEB), Clearfil Tri-S Bond (C3SB) and Xeno-III (XIII) self-etching adhesive systems, with or without light-activation, against cariogenic bacteria, and to assess the influence of human dentine on the antibacterial activity of these materials.Methods: An aliquot of 10 mu l per material (and individual components) were pipetted onto paper and dentine discs distributed in Petri dishes containing bacterial culture in BHI agar. Positive control was 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX).Results: After incubation, the adhesive components of CPB and CSEB, liquid A of XIII and C3SB did not present antibacterial activity when applied to paper discs. The non-light-activated CPB primer + adhesive promoted the greatest inhibition of Streptococcus mutans (p < 0.05), whereas with light-activation, there was no significant difference between primer + adhesive and primer alone. For Lactobacillus acidophilus, CPB primer presented the greatest antibacterial activity in both light-activation conditions (p < 0.05). Regarding the dentine discs, only CHX promoted an inhibitory effect, though less intense than on paper discs (p < 0.05). CHX presented greater antibacterial activity against S. mutans than against L. acidophilus (p < 0.05).Conclusions: Light-activation significantly reduced the antibacterial activity of the self-etching adhesive systems; MDPB incorporation contributed to the effect of adhesive systems against cariogenic bacteria; the components eluted from the adhesive systems were not capable to diffuse through 400 mu m-thick dentine disc to exert their antibacterial activity against cariogenic bacteria. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Effects of Self-Etching Adhesive Systems Used in the Dental Modelling Technique on the Cohesive Strength of Composite Resin

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.

Effect of dentinal surface preparation on bond strength of self-etching adhesive systems

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dentin surface treatments on the tensile bond strength (TBS) of the self-etching primer Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) and the one-step self-etching One-Up Bond F (OUB). The exposed flat dentin surfaces of twenty-four sound third molars were prepared with diamond bur at high-speed, carbide bur at low-speed or wet ground with #600 grit SiC paper. The adhesive systems were applied to the dentin surfaces and light-cured according to the manufacturers' instructions. A 6-mm high composite crown was incrementally built-up and each increment was light-cured for 40 seconds. After being stored in water (37°C/24 h), the samples were serially sectioned parallel to the long axis, forming beams (n = 20) with a cross-sectional area of approximately 0.8 mm 2. The specimens were tested in a Universal Testing Machine at 0.5 mm/min. The cross-sectional area was measured and the results (MPa) were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey Test (p < 0.05). Overall, the groups treated with CSE exhibited the highest TBS for all surface treatments. Dentin surfaces prepared with carbide bur at low speed reduced TBS in the CSE group; however, OUB was not affected by surface treatments. The effect of surface abrasive methods on TBS was material-dependent.

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.

Influence of voids in the hybrid layer based on self-etching adhesive systems: a 3-D FE analysis

The presence of porosities at the dentin/adhesive interface has been observed with the use of new generation dentin bonding systems. These porosities tend to contradict the concept that etching and hybridization processes occur equally and simultaneously. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the micromechanical behavior of the hybrid layer (HL) with voids based on a self-etching adhesive system using 3-D finite element (FE) analysis. Three FE models (Mr) were built: Mr, dentin specimen (41x41x82 μm) with a regular and perfect (i.e. pore-free) HL based on a self-etching adhesive system, restored with composite resin; Mp, similar to M, but containing 25% (v/v) voids in the HL; Mpp, similar to Mr, but containing 50% (v/v) voids in the HL. A tensile load (0.03N) was applied on top of the composite resin. The stress field was obtained by using Ansys Workbench 10.0. The nodes of the base of the specimen were constrained in the x, y and z axes. The maximum principal stress (σmax) was obtained for all structures at the dentin/adhesive interface. The Mpp showed the highest peak of σmax in the HL (32.2 MPa), followed by Mp (30 MPa) and Mr (28.4 MPa). The stress concentration in the peritubular dentin was high in all models (120 MPa). All other structures positioned far from voids showed similar increase of stress. Voids incorporated into the HL raised the σmax in this region by 13.5%. This behavior might be responsible for lower bond strengths of self-etching and single-bottle adhesives, as reported in the literature.

Two-year Clinical Performance of Self-etching Adhesive Systems in Composite Restorations of Anterior Teeth

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.

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.

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.