Comparison of microshear bond strengths of four self-etching bonding systems to enamel using two test methods |
| |
Authors: | Foong J Lee K Nguyen C Tang G Austin D Ch'ng C Burrow M F Thomas D L |
| |
Affiliation: | School of Dental Science, The University of Melbourne, Victoria. |
| |
Abstract: | BACKGROUND: Recent advances in enamel and dentine adhesive technology have resulted in the emergence of many new adhesive systems. Self-etching bonding systems do not require a separate etching step and the newest systems are the "all-in-one" systems which combine etching, priming and bonding into a single application. This study reports laboratory enamel microshear bond strengths of a self-etching priming and three all-in-one systems and also evaluates two different microshear bond test methods. METHODS: One hundred and nineteen enamel specimens were bonded (0.8 mm diameter) with either Clearfil Protect Bond (Kuraray), Xeno III (Dentsply), G Bond (GC) or One-Up Bond F (Tokuyama) using Palfique Estelite resin composite and stored in 37 degrees Celsius water for seven days. The microshear bond test method used either a blade or wire to apply the shear stress. Results were analysed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc (Tukey) multiple comparison analysis. RESULTS: Clearfil Protect Bond demonstrated higher and more consistent bond strengths than Xeno III, G Bond or One-Up Bond F. The wire method showed much greater reliability in results, with a coefficient of variation half that of the blade method. CONCLUSIONS: All-in-one adhesives seem to be less reliable than the two-step self-etching priming adhesive when bonding to enamel. Test method can significantly affect results in the microshear bond test method. |
| |
Keywords: | Microshear bond test all-in-one adhesives self-etching priming adhesive enamel enamel bonding |
本文献已被 PubMed 等数据库收录! |
|