THE EFFECT of DENTIN PRETREATMENT on THE MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH of SELF-ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS

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

Influence of Er,Cr: YSGG laser on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement

The purpose of this study was to investigate the bond strength of fiber post previously laser treated root canals. Forty single-rooted bovine teeth were endodontically treated, randomly and equally divided into two main groups according to the type of pretreatment: G1: 2.5% NaOCl (control group); and G2: Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Each group was further subdivided into 2 groups based on the category of adhesive systems/ luting materials used: a: an etch-and-rinse resin cement (Single Bond/RelyX ARC; 3M ESPE), and b: a self-adhesive resin cement (Rely X Unicem; 3M ESPE). Three 1.5 mm thick slabs were obtained per root and the push-out test was performed at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min until post dislodgement occurred. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey's test at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. Analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) among the groups G1a (25.44 ± 2.35) and G1b (23.62 ± 3.48), G2a (11.77 ± 2.67) and G2b (9.93 ± 3.37). Fractures were observed at the interface between the dentin and the resin in all groups. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation did not influence on the bond strength of the resin cements and the etch-and-rinse resin cement had better results on bond strength than self-adhesive resin cement.

INFLUENCE of DIFFERENT SURFACE CONDITIONING PROTOCOLS on MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH of SELF-ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS TO DENTIN

Statement of problem. According to manufacturers, bonding with self-adhesive resin cements can be achieved without any pretreatment steps such as etching, priming, or bonding. However, the benefit of saving time with these simplified luting systems may be realized at the expense of compromising the bonding capacity.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to assess whether different dentin conditioning protocols influence the bond performance of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin.Material and methods. Flat dentin surfaces from 48 human molars were divided into 4 groups (n=12): 1) control, no conditioning; 2) H(3)PO(4), etching with 37% H(3)PO(4) for 15 seconds; 3) SEBond, bonding with self-etching primer adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond); and 4) EDTA, etching with 0.1M EDTA for 60 seconds. The specimens from each dentin pre-treatment were bonded using the self-adhesive cements RelyX Unicem, Maxcem or Multilink Sprint (n=4). The resin-cement-dentin specimens were stored in water at 37 degrees C for 7 days, and serially sectioned to produce beam specimens of 1.0 mm(2) cross-sectional area. Microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) testing was performed at 1.0 mm/min. Data (MPa) were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparisons test (alpha=.05). Fractured specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope (x40) and classified as adhesive, mixed, or cohesive. Additional bonded interfaces were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).Results. Cement-dentin mu TBS was affected by the dentin conditioning approach (P <.001). RelyX Unicem attained statistically similar bond strengths to all pre-treated dentin surfaces. H(3)PO(4)-etching prior to the application of Maxcem resulted in bond strength values that were significantly higher than the other groups. The lowest mu TBS were attained when luting Multilink Sprint per manufacturers' recommendations, while H(3)PO(4)-etching produced the highest values followed by Clearfil SE bonding and EDTA. SEM observations disclosed an enhanced potential of the self-adhesive cements to form a hybrid layer when applied following manufacturer's instructions.Conclusions. When evaluated self-adhesive resin cements are used, selectively etching dentin with H(3)PO(4) prior to luting results in the most effective bonding. (J Prosthet Dent 2011;105:227-235)

Does Adhesive Resin Application Contribute to Resin Bond Durability on Etched and Silanized Feldspathic Ceramic?

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Durability of Microtensile Bond to Nonetched and Etched Feldspar Ceramic: Self-adhesive Resin Cements vs Conventional Resin

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of thermocycling (TC), self-adhesive resin cements and surface conditioning on the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) between feldspathic ceramic blocks and resin cements.Materials and Methods: Fifty-six feldspathic ceramic blocks (10 x 7 x 5 mm) (Vita Mark II) were divided into groups according to the factors "resin cement" (3 cements) and "surface conditioning" (no conditioning or conditioning [10% hydrofluoric acid etching for 5 min + silanization]) (n = 8): group 1: conditioning+Variolink II (control group); group 2: no conditioning+Biscem; group 3: no conditioning+RelyX U100; group 4: no conditioning+Maxcem Elite; group 5: conditioning+Biscem; group 6: conditioning+RelyX U100; group 7: conditioning+Maxcem Elite. The ceramic-cement blocks were sectioned to produce non-trimmed bar specimens (adhered cross-sectional area: 1 +/- 0.1 mm(2)), which were divided into two storage conditions: dry, mu TBS immediately after cutting; TC (12,000x, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C). Statistical significance was deterimined using two-way ANOVA (7 strategies and 2 storage conditions) and the post-hoc Tukey test (p<0.05).Results: Resin cement and thermocycling affected the mu TBS significantly (p = 0.001). In the dry condition, group 5 (18 +/- 6.5 MPa) presented the lowest values of mu TBS when compared to the other groups. TC decreased the mean mu TBS values significantly (p<0.05) for all resin cements tested (9.7 +/- 2.3 to 22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa), except for the resin cement RelyX U100 (22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa). In groups 3 and 4, it was not possible to measure mu TBS, since these groups had 100% pre-test failures during sectioning. Moreover, the same occurred in group 2 after TC, where 100% failure was observed during thermocycling (spontaneous failures).Conclusion: Hydrofluoric acid etching and silanization of the feldspathic ceramic surface are essential for bonding self-adhesive resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used. Non-etched ceramic is not recommended.

Adhesive Quality of Self-adhesive and Conventional Adhesive Resin Cement to Y-TZP Ceramic Before and After Aging Conditions

Purpose: This study evaluated the adhesive quality of simplified self-adhesive and conventional resin cements to Y-TZP in dry and aged conditions. Methods: Y-TZP ceramic blocks (N=192) (5 x 5 x 2 mm) were embedded in acrylic resin and randomly divided into two groups, based on surface conditioning: 96% isopropanol or chairside tribochemical silica coating and silanization. Conditioned ceramics were divided into four groups to receive the resin cements (Panavia F 2.0, Variolink II, RelyX U100 and Maxcem). After 24 hours, half of the specimens (n=12) from each group were submitted to shear bond strength testing (0.5 nun/minute). The remaining specimens were tested after 90 days of water storage at 37 degrees C and thermocycling (12,000x, 5 degrees C-55 degrees C). Failure types were then assessed. The data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA and the Tukey's test (alpha=0.05). Results: Significant effects of ceramic conditioning, cement type and storage conditions were observed (p<0.0001). The groups cleaned using alcohol only showed low bond strength values in dry conditions and the bond strength was reduced dramatically after aging. Groups conditioned using silica coating and silanization showed higher bond strengths both in dry and aged conditions. A high number of specimens failed prematurely prior to testing when they were cleaned using 96% isopropanol. Conclusion: Overall, silica coating and silanization showed higher, stable bond strengths with and without aging. The durability of resin-ceramic adhesion varied, depending on the adhesive cement type.

Interaction between total-etch and self-etch adhesives and conventional and self-adhesive resin cements

The aim of this study was to compare the bond strength to enamel between resin cements combined with total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems and a self-adhesive cement. Eighty bovine incisors had their buccal surface ground flat exposing a plane area in the enamel. Eighty Artglass resin cylinders measuring 3 mm in diameter and 4 mm in height were fabricated. The teeth were divided into eight groups of 10 teeth each and the resin cylinders were cemented with different adhesive systems and resin cements; G1: RelyX Unicem (self-adhesive cement); G2: H 3PO 4 + Single Bond + RelyX ARC; G3: AdheSE + Variolink II; G4: H 3PO 4 + Excite + Variolink II; G5: Xeno III + Enforce; G6: H 3PO 4 + Prime&Bond NT + Enforce; G7: Biatite Primers 1 and 2 + Bistite II DC; G8: H 3PO 4 + Bistite Primers 1 and 2 + Bistite II DC. After application of the adhesives, the cylinders were cemented according to manufacturer instructions. The specimens were submitted to 2000 thermal cycles at a temperature ranging from 5±5°C to 55±5°C, and shear bond strength was then tested at a variety of 1 mm/min. The data were analyzed by ANOVA and the Tukey's test (á=5%), obtaining a p value of 0.00. The following mean (±standard deviation) bond strength values were observed for each group: G1: 5.14(±0.99)a; G3: 16.23(±4.69)b; G7: 17.82(±3.66)b; G5: 18.48(±2.88)bc; G8: 20.15(±4.12)bc; G4: 22.85(±3.08)cd; G2: 24.96(±2.89)d; G6: 26.07(±1.69)d. Groups followed by the same letters did not differ significantly. For most of the resin cements tested, the application of adhesive systems using acid etching resulted in a higher bond strength when compared to the self-etch adhesive systems and to the self-adhesive cement.

Durability of the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to human dentin

This study subjected two self-adhesive resin cements and two conventional resin cements to dry and aging conditions, to compare their microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) to dentin. Using four different luting systems (n = 10), 40 composite resin blocks (each 5x5x4 mm) were cemented to flat human crown dentin surfaces. The specimens were stored in water for 24 hours (37°C), at which point each specimen was sectioned along two axes to obtain beams that were divided randomly into two groups: dry samples, which were tested immediately, and samples that were subjected to accelerated aging conditions (12, 000 thermocycles followed by storage for 150 days). The μTBS results were affected significantly by the luting system used (P < 40001). Only the μTBS of Rely-X Unicem was reduced significantly after aging; the μTBS remained stable or increased for the other self-adhesive resin cement and the two conventional cements.

Durability of Adhesion between Feldspathic Ceramic and Resin Cements: Effect of Adhesive Resin, Polymerization Mode of Resin Cement, and Aging

Purpose: Adhesive cementation is an important step for restorations made of feldspathic ceramic as it increases the strength of such materials. Incorrect selection of the adhesive resin and the resin cement to adhere to the ceramic surface and their durability against aging can affect the adhesion between these materials and the clinical performance. This study evaluated the effect of adhesive resins with different pHs, resin cements with different polymerization modes, and aging on the bond strength to feldspathic ceramic. Materials and Methods: One surface of feldspathic ceramic blocks (VM7) (N = 90) (6.4 × 6.4 × 4.8 mm3) was conditioned with 10% hydrofluoric acid for 20 seconds, washed/dried, and silanized. Three adhesive resins (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus [SBMP], pH: 5.6; Single Bond [SB], pH: 3.4; and Prime&Bond NT [NT], pH: 1.7) were applied on the ceramic surfaces (n = 30 per adhesive). For each adhesive group, three resin cements with different polymerization modes were applied (n = 10 per cement): photo-polymerized (Variolink II base), dual polymerized (Variolink II base + catalyst), and chemically polymerized (C&B). The bonded ceramic blocks were stored in water (37°C) for 24 hours and sectioned to produce beam specimens (cross-sectional bonded area: 1 ± 0.1 mm2). The beams of each block were randomly divided into two conditions: Dry, microtensile test immediately after cutting; TC, test was performed after thermocycling (12,000×, 5°C to 55°C) and water storage at 37°C for 150 days. Considering the three factors of the study (adhesive [3 levels], resin cement [3 levels], aging [2 levels]), 18 groups were studied. The microtensile bond strength data were analyzed using 3-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (α= 0.05). Results: Adhesive resin type (p < 0.001) and the resin cement affected the mean bond strength (p= 0.0003) (3-way ANOVA). The NT adhesive associated with the chemically polymerized resin cement in both dry (8.8 ± 6.8 MPa) and aged conditions (6.9 ± 5.9 MPa) presented statistically lower bond strength results, while the SBMP adhesive resin, regardless of the resin cement type, presented the highest results (15.4 to 18.5 and 14.3 to 18.9 MPa) in both dry and aged conditions, respectively (Tukey's test). Conclusion: Application of a low-pH adhesive resin onto a hydrofluoric acid etched and silanized feldspathic ceramic surface in combination with chemically polymerized resin cement did not deliver favorable results. The use of adhesive resin with high pH could be clinically advised for the photo-, dual-, and chemically polymerized resin cements tested. © 2012 by the American College of Prosthodontists.

Adhesion of substrate-adherent combinations for early composite repairs: Effect of intermediate adhesive resin application

This study evaluated the effect of intermediate adhesive resin application (IAR) on tensile bond strength (TBS) for early composite repairs in situations where substrate and repair composite bonded together were once of the same kind with the substrate (similar) and once other than the substrate material (dissimilar). Specimens from three types of composites (TPH Spectrum (TPH), Charisma (CHA) and Filtek Z250 (Z250)) were fabricated. The specimens in each composite group (n=72) were randomly divided into six subgroups (n=12). In each composite group, the similar and two dissimilar composites were bonded onto the substrates once using an IAR (Adper Single Bond Plus) and once without. After water storage for I week at 37 degrees C, substrate-adherent combinations were submitted to tensile test. Data were analyzed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (alpha=0.05). The substrate-adherent combination (p=0.0001), adherent (repair) composite (p=0.0001), and application of IAR (p=0.0001) significantly affected the results. Utilization of IAR improved the repair bond strength for all composite combinations. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Indirect resin onlay cemented with self-adhesive resin cement: a comprehensive clinical overview

Advances in adhesive technology and esthetic dental materials have permitted clinicians to perform conservative preparation of the dentition for onlay restorations. Indirect resin onlays are a great alternative to dental crowns for reestablishment the function and esthetic in teeth with great destruction.

Influence of technique and manipulation on self-adhesive resin cements used to cement intraradicular posts

Statement of problem: Resin cements are widely used to cement intraradicular posts, but bond strength is significantly influenced by the technique and material used for cementation. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of 3 self-adhesive cements used to cement intraradicular glass fiber posts. The cements all required different application and handling techniques. Material and Methods: Forty-five human maxillary canines were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups n= 15 by drawing lots: Group BIS – Biscem, Group BRE – Breeze, and Group MAX – Maxcem. Each group was divided into 3 subgroups according to application and handling techniques: Sub-group A – Automix/Point tip applicator, Sub-group L – Handmix/Lentulo, and Sub-group C – Handmix/Centrix. Cementation of the posts was performed according to the manufacturers’ instructions. The push-out test was performed with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, and bond strength was expressed in megapascals. The results were evaluated by 2-way ANOVA and the all pairwise multiple comparison procedures (Tukey test) (?=.05). Results: Breeze cement showed the highest average for the subgroups A, L, and C when compared to the Biscem cement and Maxcem Elite (P<.05). Statistically significant differences among the subgroups were only observed for Biscem. Conclusions: This study shows that application and handling techniques may influence the bond strength of different self-adhesive cements when used for intraradicular post cementation.

Push-out bond strength of CAD/CAM-ceramic luted to dentin with self-adhesive resin cements

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the initial and the artificially aged push-out bond strength between ceramic and dentin produced by one of five resin cements. METHODS: Two-hundred direct ceramic restorations (IPS Empress CAD) were luted to standardized Class I cavities in extracted human molars using one of four self-adhesive cements (SpeedCEM, RelyX Unicem Aplicap, SmartCem2 and iCEM) or a reference etch-and-rinse resin cement (Syntac/Variolink II) (n=40/cement). Push-out bond strength (PBS) was measured (1) after 24h water storage (non-aged group; n=20/cement) or (2) after artificial ageing with 5000 thermal cycles followed by 6 months humid storage (aged group; n=20/cement). Nonparametrical ANOVA and pairwise Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Bonferroni-Holm adjustment were applied for statistical analysis. The significance level was set at alpha=0.05. In addition, failure mode and fracture pattern were analyzed by stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: Whereas no statistically significant effect of storage condition was found (p=0.441), there was a significant effect of resin cement (p<0.0001): RelyX Unicem showed significantly higher PBS than the other cements. Syntac/Variolink II showed significantly higher PBS than SmartCEM2 (p<0.001). No significant differences were found between SpeedCEM, SmartCem2, and iCEM. The predominant failure mode was adhesive failure of cements at the dentin interface except for RelyX Unicem which in most cases showed cohesive failure in ceramic. SIGNIFICANCE: The resin cements showed marked differences in push-out bond strength when used for luting ceramic restorations to dentin. Variolink II with the etch-and-rinse adhesive Syntac did not perform better than three of the four self-adhesive resin cements tested.