Role of preliminary etching for one‐step self‐etch adhesives

Taschner M, Nato F, Mazzoni A, Frankenberger R, Krämer N, Di Lenarda R, Petschelt A, Breschi L. Role of preliminary etching for one‐step self‐etch adhesives.
Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118: 517–524. © 2010 Eur J Oral Sci The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of preliminary phosphoric acid etching of enamel and dentine before the application of two, one‐step self‐etch adhesive systems. The systems were applied onto acid‐etched or smear‐layer‐covered enamel and dentine. The treatment groups were as follows: group 1, Adper Easy Bond (3M ESPE) on etched substrate; group 2, Adper Easy Bond (control); group 3, iBond Self‐Etch (Heraeus Kulzer) on etched substrate; and group 4, iBond Self‐Etch (control). Enamel and dentine bond strengths were calculated using microshear and microtensile bond‐strength tests. Additional specimens were prepared to evaluate nanoleakage at the dentine–adhesive interface and were investigated using light microscopy or transmission electron microscopy. Both adhesives demonstrated higher microshear bond strengths when enamel was pre‐acid‐etched with phosphoric acid (Adper Easy Bond 28.7 ± 4.8 MPa; iBond Self‐Etch 19.7 ± 3.6 MPa) compared with controls (Adper Easy Bond 19.2 ± 3.3 MPa; iBond Self‐Etch 17.5 ± 2.7 MPa) and increased microtensile bond strength when applied on acid‐etched (Adper Easy Bond 35.8 ± 5.7 MPa; iBond Self‐Etch 24.3 ± 7.9 MPa) vs. smear‐layer‐covered dentine (Adper Easy Bond 26.9 ± 6.2 MPa; iBond Self‐Etch 17.6 ± 4.3 MPa). Adper Easy Bond showed lower nanoleakage than iBond Self‐Etch, irrespective of preliminary etching. The results of this study support the use of phosphoric acid etching before the application of one‐step self‐etch adhesive systems.     

Comparison between universal adhesives and two‐step self‐etch adhesives in terms of dentin bond fatigue durability in self‐etch mode

This aim of this study was to compare universal adhesives and two‐step self‐etch adhesives in terms of dentin bond fatigue durability in self‐etch mode. Three universal adhesives – Clearfil Universal, G‐Premio Bond, and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive – and three‐two‐step self‐etch adhesives – Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil SE Bond 2, and OptiBond XTR – were used. The initial shear bond strength and shear fatigue strength of resin composite bonded to adhesive on dentin in self‐etch mode were determined. Scanning electron microscopy observations of fracture surfaces after bond strength tests were also made. The initial shear bond strength of universal adhesives was material dependent, unlike that of two‐step self‐etch adhesives. The shear fatigue strength of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive was not significantly different from that of two‐step self‐etch adhesives, unlike the other universal adhesives. The shear fatigue strength of universal adhesives differed depending on the type of adhesive, unlike those of two‐step self‐etch adhesives. The results of this study encourage the continued use of two‐step self‐etch adhesive over some universal adhesives but suggest that changes to the composition of universal adhesives may lead to a dentin bond fatigue durability similar to that of two‐step self‐etch adhesives.     

Optimization of direct currents to enhance dentine bonding of simplified one‐step adhesive

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different direct current intensities on dentine bonding effectiveness of Clearfil S³ Bond and on cell viability of human dental pulp cells (HDPCs). Thirty‐five‐third molars were sectioned and ground to provide flat surfaces. Clearfil S³ Bond was applied under different current conditions for 30 s and then resin composite was built up. Specimens were processed for microtensile bond strength (µTBS) testing and for nanoleakage investigation using scanning electron microscopy. Primary HDPCs isolated from premolars were stimulated with different intensities of electric current for 30 s. Then, cell viability was tested using the 3‐(4,5‐dimethylthiazol‐2‐yl)‐2,5‐diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay. Specimens bonded with application of electrical current intensities of 50, 60, 70, and 90 µA exhibited a significant increase in immediate µTBS compared with all other groups. Bonded interfaces prepared using electrically assisted current application showed reduced interfacial nanoleakage upon scanning electron microscopy. Electric current application, from 20 to 70 µA, had no effect on the viability of HDPCs. This study provides further evidence for its future clinical use.     

Surface free‐energy measurements as indicators of the bonding characteristics of single‐step self‐etching adhesives

Inoue N, Tsujimoto A, Takimoto M, Ootsuka E, Endo H, Takamizawa T, Miyazaki M. Surface free‐energy measurements as indicators of the bonding characteristics of single‐step self‐etching adhesives.
Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118: 525–530. © 2010 Eur J Oral Sci This study examined the surface free‐energy of dentin treated with the single‐step self‐etching adhesives Bond Force, Clearfil tri‐S Bond, and G‐Bond Plus. The labial dentin surfaces of bovine mandibular incisors were wet ground with #180‐, #600‐, and #2,000‐grit silicon carbide paper. The adhesives were applied to the ground dentin, and then rinsed with acetone and distilled water. The surface free‐energies were determined by measuring the contact angles of three test liquids placed on the adhesive‐treated dentin. The surface free‐energies of the samples treated with the G‐Bond Plus and Clearfil tri‐S Bond adhesives increased as the surface roughness decreased. No significant differences in the surface free‐energy were found for the samples treated with the Bond Force adhesive, regardless of the surface roughness. These results indicated that dentin surfaces treated with adhesives did not promote a higher surface‐energy state, and that differences in the components of surface energy were apparent for the adhesives tested.     

Effect of tin–chloride pretreatment on bond strength of two adhesive systems to dentin

Objectives

To determine the effect on resin composite-to-dentin bond strength of incorporation of an acidic tin–chloride pretreatment in two adhesive systems.

Materials and methods

Human molars were ground to expose mid-coronal dentin. For microtensile bond strength (μTBS) testing, dentin was treated with Optibond FL or Clearfil SE according to one of six protocols (n?=?22/group). Group 1: Phosphoric acid etching, Optibond FL Prime, Optibond FL Adhesive (manufacturer’s instructions; control); Group 2: Tin–chloride pretreatment, Optibond FL Prime, Optibond FL Adhesive; Group 3: Phosphoric acid etching, tin–chloride pretreatment, Optibond FL Prime, Optibond FL Adhesive; Group 4: Clearfil SE Primer, Clearfil SE Bond (manufacturer’s instructions; control); Group 5: Phosphoric acid etching, Clearfil SE Primer, Clearfil SE Bond; and Group 6: Tin–chloride pretreatment, Clearfil SE Primer, Clearfil SE Bond. The molars were then built up with resin composite (Clearfil Majesty Esthetic). After storage (1 week, 100  % humidity, 37 °C) the μTBS was measured and failure mode was determined. Additionally, pretreated dentin surfaces were evaluated using SEM and EDX. The μTBS results were analyzed statistically by a Welch Two Sample t-test and a Kruskal–Wallis test followed by exact Wilcoxon rank sum tests with Bonferroni–Holm adjustment for multiple testing (α?=?0.05).

Results

When Optibond FL was used, partial or total replacement of phosphoric acid with tin–chloride decreased μTBS significantly. In contrast, when Clearfil SE was used, inclusion of a tin–chloride pretreatment in the adhesive procedure increased μTBS significantly.

Conclusions

Tin–chloride pretreatment had a beneficial influence on the bond promoting capacity of the MDP-containing adhesive system Clearfil SE.     

Effects of thermocycling and use of ElectroBond on microtensile strength and nanoleakage using commercial one‐step self‐etch adhesives

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of thermocycling and the use of an electronically assisted application technique on the microtensile bond strength and nanoleakage of bonded interfaces created using one‐step self‐etch adhesives. Composite build‐ups were bonded coronally to sectioned human molars using XENO III or Clearfil S³Bond. Adhesives were applied following the manufacturers’ instructions (control) or with the aid of an electrical application device (ElectroBond). Teeth were sectioned into non‐trimmed bonded beams for microtensile testing. Half of the specimens were subjected to 20,000 thermocycles, and the controls were not thermocycled. All specimens were tested to failure and peak stress was calculated. Additional specimens were prepared for nanoleakage analysis using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The immediate bond strength of both adhesives increased as a result of using the ElectroBond device (XENO III 38.9 ± 8.1 MPa; Clearfil S³Bond 46.2 ± 9.9 MPa) compared with no use of the device (XENO III 26.7 ± 7.8 MPa; Clearfil S³Bond 38.9 ± 8.1 MPa). Thermocycling significantly decreased the bond strength of XENO III (27.1 ± 7.9 MPa with the use of ElectroBond; 20.7 ± 9.2 MPa without the use of ElectroBond); however, thermocycling did not affect the Clearfil S³Bond strength (47.2 ± 8.6 MPa with the use of ElectroBond; 33.6 ± 8.3 MPa without the use of ElectroBond). Reduced nanoleakage was found for both resins as a result of the use of the ElectroBond device, with or without thermocycling. Application of one‐step, self‐etch adhesives with the ElectroBond device significantly increased microtensile bond strength and reduced nanoleakage, but the effect of thermocycling was found to be brand‐dependent.     

Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin‐modified,glass‐ionomer cement lining: a 1‐year randomized,clinical trial

Aim: To investigate the effect of resin‐modified, glass‐ionomer cement lining on the quality of posterior resin composite restorations, bonded with a two‐step, total‐etch or self‐etching adhesive, at 1 year. Methods: Patients with 1–4 moderate‐to‐deep, primary occlusal caries in molars were informed and recruited. A total of 110 composite restorations were placed in 75 participants, with one of four restorative procedures: (a) bonded with a total‐etch adhesive (Single Bond 2); (b) lined with glass‐ionomer cement (Fuji Lining LC), and then bonded with total‐etch adhesive; (c) bonded with a self‐etching adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond); and (d) lined with glass‐ionomer cement, and then bonded with self‐etching adhesive. Results: At 1 year, 57 patients (86 restorations) attended the recall. Each of the restorations was evaluated and scored from 1 (clinically excellent) to 5 (clinically poor) using the following criteria: (a) patient satisfaction; (b) fracture and retention; (c) marginal adaptation; (d) recurrent caries; and (e) post‐operative sensitivity. At 1 year, the qualities of the restorations were not significantly affected by the placement of glass‐ionomer cement lining, regardless of the adhesive used (P > 0.05). Most of the restorations were scored 1 for all criteria. Conclusions: The benefit of placing a glass‐ionomer cement liner in resin composite restoration is questionable.     

Effects of chlorhexidine on bonding durability of different adhesive systems using a novel thermocycling method

Background

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of chlorhexidine on the bonding durability of etch‐and‐rinse and self‐etch adhesive systems using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) thermocycling method.

Methods

Twenty freshly extracted intact human third molars were ground and bonded with either an etch‐and‐rinse adhesive (Single‐Bond) or a self‐etch adhesive (G‐Bond). Specimens were either left untouched or placed in PCR tubes filled with three thermocycling mediums: water, chlorhexidine or silicone oil. Thermocycling (5000 cycles) was done using the PCR programme at temperatures of 5 °C and 55 °C. The microtensile bond strength (μTBS) was evaluated and interfacial nanoleakage was assessed by scanning electron microscopy before and after thermocycling.

Results

Significant differences were detected among groups kept in different media after thermocycling. For Single‐Bond, both the chlorhexidine and silicone oil groups could preserve the μTBS (p < 0.001). For G‐Bond, μTBS of the chlorhexidine and water groups were significantly decreased (p < 0.05). No obvious increase in silver deposition was observed in specimens incubated in water after thermocycling, less silver penetration was found in specimens incubated in chlorhexidine.

Conclusions

In this experimental model, chlorhexidine was found to preserve bonding durability in Single‐Bond but have no significant effects on G‐Bond.     

Bond strength of self-etch adhesives to dentin prepared with three different diamond burs.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the micro-tensile bond strength (mu TBS) of a control etch-and-rinse and three self-etch (strong, mild, ultra-mild) adhesive systems to dentin prepared with three different grit size of diamond burs. METHODS: Dentin surfaces were created from mid-coronal sound dentin in extracted, human third molars. The teeth were ground with high-speed medium grit (100 microm), fine grit (30 microm), or extra-fine grit (15 microm) diamond bur. Resin composite (Z100) was bonded to the surfaces using Optibond FL, Adper Prompt L-Pop, Clearfil SE Bond, or Clearfil S3 Bond. Rectangular micro-specimens were prepared using the slow-speed diamond saw and tested in tensile to determine the mu TBS. Failure analysis was performed using a stereo-microscope and Fe-SEM. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's HSD test (p<0.05). RESULTS: The etch-and-rinse adhesive yielded high micro-tensile values (58-69 MPa), irrespective of the diamond burs used. The bond strength values were comparable for Adper Prompt L-Pop and Clearfil SE Bond irrespective of the burs used. The mu TBS values were significantly higher as the particle size of diamond burs is smaller for Clearfil S3 Bond. Most failures were recorded as interfacial failure when the fine and extra-fine diamond burs were used. SIGNIFICANCE: Overall, different grit-sized diamond burs did not affect the mechanical properties of the interface, except for the ultra-mild one step self-etch adhesive. This adhesive performed significantly better when a smaller grit size was used to prepare dentin surface.     

Effect of a one‐step self‐etch adhesive on endogenous dentin matrix metalloproteinases

Degradation of the hybrid layer created in dentin by dentin adhesives is caused by enzyme activities present within the dentin matrix that destroy unprotected collagen fibrils. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of a one‐step self‐etch adhesive system on dentinal matrix metalloproteinases 2 and 4 (MMP‐2 and MMP‐9, respectively) using in situ zymography and an enzymatic activity assay. The null hypothesis tested was that there are no differences in the activities of dentinal MMPs before and after treatment with a one‐step adhesive system. The MMP‐2 and MMP‐9 activities in dentin treated with the one‐step adhesive, Adper Easy Bond, were quantified using an enzymatic activity assay system. The MMP activities within the hybrid layer created by the one‐step adhesive tested were also evaluated using in situ zymography. The enzymatic assay revealed an increase in MMP‐2 and MMP‐9 activities after treatment with adhesive. In situ zymography indicated that gelatinolytic activity is present within the hybrid layer created with the one‐step self‐etch adhesive. The host‐derived gelatinases were localized within the hybrid layer and remained active after the bonding procedure. It is concluded that the one‐step self‐etch adhesive investigated activates endogenous MMP‐2 and MMP‐9 with the dentin matrix, which may cause collagen degradation over time.     

Bonding effectiveness of two contemporary self-etch adhesives to enamel and dentin

Objectives

Among contemporary adhesives, self-etch adhesives have been adopted by general practitioners for routine adhesive restorative purposes, mainly because of their ease of use. However, many versions that differ for their clinical application procedure, pH, number of components, etc., are currently available on the market. The purpose of this study was to determine the bonding effectiveness of two new self-etch adhesives (Adper Easy Bond and Adper ScotchBond SE, 3M ESPE) to enamel and dentin using a micro-tensile bond strength (μTBS) protocol and to characterise the interfacial ultra-structure at enamel and dentin using transmission electron microscopy (TEM).

Methods

The adhesives were applied onto coronal human enamel and dentin surfaces and built up with the micro-hybrid resin composite Z100 (3M ESPE). The ‘gold-standard’ two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) served as control. Specimens were sectioned to sticks and trimmed at the interface to a cylindrical hour-glass shape (‘trimmed’ micro-specimens). Non-demineralized and demineralized TEM sections through the adhesive-dentin/enamel interface were prepared by ultra-microtomy.

Results

The μTBS of the two self-etch adhesives to enamel was statistically significantly lower than that of the control. To dentin, the μTBS of Adper Easy Bond was significantly lower than that of Adper ScotchBond SE and the control. TEM showed a tight interface to enamel for all three self-etch adhesives. A relatively thick, completely demineralized and acid-resistant hybrid layer was formed at dentin by Adper ScotchBond SE, whereas the interaction of Adper Easy Bond was much shallower, and comparable to that of so-called ‘ultra-mild’ self-etch adhesives. Some degree of spot- and cluster-like nano-leakage was observed for both adhesives, but did not differ in extent and form from that observed for the control.

Conclusions

Although the new two self-etch adhesives revealed a tight interaction at both enamel and dentin, their bond strength to both tooth tissues was generally lower than that of the control adhesive. Nevertheless, their bonding effectiveness appears in line with other simplified self-etch adhesives.     

Effect of a functional monomer (MDP) on the enamel bond durability of single‐step self‐etch adhesives

The present study aimed to determine the effect of the functional monomer, 10‐methacryloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP), on the enamel bond durability of single‐step self‐etch adhesives through integrating fatigue testing and long‐term water storage. An MDP‐containing self‐etch adhesive, Clearfil Bond SE ONE (SE), and an experimental adhesive, MDP‐free (MF), which comprised the same ingredients as SE apart from MDP, were used. Shear bond strength (SBS) and shear fatigue strength (SFS) were measured with or without phosphoric acid pre‐etching. The specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 h, 6 months, or 1 yr. Although similar SBS and SFS values were obtained for SE with pre‐etching and for MF after 24 h of storage in distilled water, SE with pre‐etching showed higher SBS and SFS values than MF after storage in water for 6 months or 1 yr. Regardless of the pre‐etching procedure, SE showed higher SBS and SFS values after 6 months of storage in distilled water than after 24 h or 1 yr. To conclude, MDP might play an important role in enhancing not only bond strength but also bond durability with respect to repeated subcritical loading after long‐term water storage.     

Adhesion to Er:YAG laser and bur prepared root and crown dentine

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strengths between dentine and resin composite obtained after Er:YAG laser treatment of crown or root dentine used together with self‐etch and total‐etch adhesive systems. Methods: One etch‐and‐rinse adhesive (Single Bond, 3M, USA) and one self‐etch system (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray, Japan) were applied to root and crown dentine prepared with a regular bur in a turbine or with an Er:YAG laser. The shear bond strength was determined after thermocycling and statistically analysed using independent t‐tests. Results: Crown sites bonded using Clearfil SE Bond and Single Bond adhesives yielded bond strengths similar to that of root dentine sites (p > 0.05). Clearfil SE Bond was stronger in both the lased and non‐lased groups (p < 0.05). The lowest bond strength was obtained when Single Bond without acid etching was used on Er:YAG ablated dentine. When total‐etch adhesive was used, there were significant differences (p < 0.05) between the laser‐ablated and laser‐ablated/acid‐etched and bur‐cut/acid‐etched groups. Conclusions: Er:YAG laser irradiation of root and crown dentine conducted prior to the adhesive protocol adversely affected adhesion and decreased bond strength compared with traditional preparation.     

Influence of photo-curing distance on bond strength and nanoleakage of self-etching adhesive bonds to enamel and dentin

Objectives. To assess the influence of light-curing unit tip distance on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and nanoleakage of self-etching adhesives to enamel and dentin. Materials and methods. Flat buccal surfaces were prepared on 198 bovine incisors. The teeth were randomly assigned into nine groups for μTBS (n = 8) and nanoleakage (n = 3) testing according to the adhesive system (Clearfil Protect Bond, Clearfil Tri-S Bond or One Up Bond F Plus) and distance from the light-curing tip (0, 3 or 6 mm). The bonded samples were tested in tension (0.5 mm/min) and nanoleakage was analyzed using SEM. Results. Clearfil Protect Bond exhibited the highest tensile strength on both enamel and dentin. Leakage was higher in samples exposed at a distance of 6 mm on enamel and 0 mm on dentin. One Up Bond F Plus experienced the greatest amount of nanoleakage on both substrates. Conclusions. Light-curing unit distance did not influence the μTBS of the adhesives, but nanoleakage increased on enamel samples when photoactivation occurred at a distance of 6 mm.     

Microtensile bond strength of current dentin adhesives measured immediately and 24 hours after application

PURPOSE: To evaluate the immediate microtensile bond strengths achieved with representative adhesive systems from each of the four current bonding approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Resin composite was bonded incrementally to flat, midcoronal dentin from 33 human molars, using the adhesives (Adper Scotchbond MP; Adper Scotchbond 1; Optibond Solo Plus; Clearfil SE Bond; AdheSE; Tyrian SPE + One Step Plus; Optibond Solo Plus self-etching; One-Up Bond F; iBond; Adper Prompt L-Pop; Xeno III) according to the respective manufacturer's instructions. The bonded specimens were immediately sectioned into sticks and underwent microtensile bond testing either immediately or after 24 h. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and LSD tests. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between immediate and 24-h bond strengths (p > 0.05). However, significant differences were observed among adhesives (p = 0.001). The all-in-one adhesive iBond showed statistically lower values when compared to all the other adhesives. Adper Prompt L-Pop, Xeno III, Tyrian SPE + One Step Plus and One-Up Bond F, all self-etching adhesives, were significantly weaker than AdheSE, Optibond Solo Plus, Adper Scotchbond 1, Optibond Solo Plus self-etching, Clearfil SE Bond, and Adper Scotchbond MP, which did not differ statistically from each other. CONCLUSION: Microtensile bond strengths of representative adhesive systems from the four categories of bonding agents were not equivalent, with the lowest values recorded for the one-step self-etching adhesives. There were no differences in the bond strengths when measured immediately and after 24 h.     

Evaluation of microtensile bond strength of different fissure sealants to bovine enamel

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of a new fissure sealant and compare it with conventional sealants which are applied to enamel alone, and also with self‐etch and etch‐and‐rinse adhesives. Methods: Enamel specimens were prepared and randomly distributed into three groups according to fissure sealant (Aegis, Helioseal F, Helioseal Clear). Each group was then subdivided according to adhesive system (Clearfil S3, Single Bond, no adhesive). A universal testing machine was used to measure μTBS, and data were analysed using one‐way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests. Results: μTBS values for all Aegis subgroups were significantly lower than for comparable Helioseal F and Helioseal Clear subgroups (p < 0.05). No differences were observed in μTBS of Helioseal F and Helioseal Clear (p > 0.05). In the Helioseal Clear group, μTBS values for Single Bond were significantly higher than for Clearfil S3 (p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found between the μTBS values of the adhesive subgroups in the Aegis or Helioseal F groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Sealant μTBS values may be affected by material content. The addition of an adhesive may improve μTBS values of sealant to enamel.     

Two-year bond strengths of "all-in-one" adhesives to dentine

Objectives

To test the long-term in vitro bonding performance of “all-in-one” self-etch adhesives to dentine.

Methods

Adper Prompt (3M ESPE), Bond Force (Tokuyama), Brush &; Bond (Parkell), iBond Self Etch (Heraeus Kulzer), OptiBond All-In-One (Kerr), and Xeno IV (Dentsply Caulk) were tested. The two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) served as the control. Extracted human teeth were assigned to groups after creation of smear layer on occlusal dentine. Adhesives were applied according to manufacturers’ instructions, and resin composite (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE) build-ups were placed. The bonded specimens were sectioned into beams after 24 h of storage in water. Microtensile bond strengths (μTBS) was determined at baseline, and following one and two years of water storage using an EZ-Test device (Shimadzu). Representative specimens were examined under field emission scanning electron microscope. Fracture mode was recorded. The data were analyzed using linear mixed effects and least square means analyses. The significance level was set at 0.01 for the pairwise comparisons and at 0.05 for the overall model effects.

Results

The mean μTBS decreased significantly over time for Adper Prompt, iBond Self Etch, and OptiBond All-In-One. After two years of water ageing, Bond Force, Brush &; Bond, OptiBond All-In-One, and Xeno IV had mean μTBS values not statistically different from Clearfil SE Bond.

Conclusions

After two years of water ageing, Clearfil SE Bond outperformed two of six all-in-one adhesives. That indicates that the composition of the adhesives rather than their application approach is accountable for their performance.

Clinical significance

Despite the data available suggesting that most all-in-one adhesives are severely affected by hydrolytic degradation, results of the present in vitro study suggest that some may perform as well as the clinically proven Clearfil SE Bond in the longer term.     

Enamel microhardness and bond strengths of self‐etching primer adhesives

Adebayo OA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ, Adams GG, Collins ML. Enamel microhardness and bond strengths of self‐etching primer adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118: 191–196. © 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 Eur J Oral Sci The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between enamel surface microhardness and microshear bond strength (μSBS). Buccal and lingual mid‐coronal enamel sections were prepared from 22 permanent human molars and divided into two groups, each comprising the buccal and lingual enamel from 11 teeth, to analyze two self‐etching primer adhesives (Clearfil SE Bond and Tokuyama Bond Force). One‐half of each enamel surface was tested using the Vickers hardness test with 10 indentations at 1 N and a 15‐s dwell time. A hybrid resin composite was bonded to the other half of the enamel surface with the adhesive system assigned to the group. After 24 h of water storage of specimens at 37º°C, the μSBS test was carried out on a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm min^?1 until bond failure occurred. The mean μSBS was regressed on the mean Vickers hardness number (VHN) using a weighted regression analysis in order to explore the relationship between enamel hardness and μSBS. The weights used were the inverse of the variance of the μSBS means. Neither separate correlation analyses for each adhesive nor combined regression analyses showed a significant correlation between the VHN and the μSBS. These results suggest that the μSBS of the self‐etch adhesive systems are not influenced by enamel surface microhardness.     

Influence of preliminary etching on the stability of bonds created by one-step self-etch bonding systems

We evaluated the effects of preliminary etching of dentine on the stability of the bond created by one-step self-etch adhesives under different storage conditions. Adper Easy Bond (3M ESPE) and iBond Self-Etch (iBond SE; Heraeus Kulzer) were applied with an etch-and-rinse (i.e. after preliminary phosphoric acid etching for 15 s) or a self-etch approach. Resin-dentine bonded specimens were sectioned perpendicularly to the adhesive interface according to the 'non-trimming technique'. Beams were stored in artificial saliva for 24 h, 6 months, or 1 yr at 37°C, or in 10% NaOCl for 5 h at room temperature, and then stressed until failure; the microtensile bond strengths were calculated. Interfacial nanoleakage of additional teeth was evaluated using light microscopy or transmission electron microscopy. Adper Easy Bond showed higher bond strength than iBond SE, regardless of the dentine treatment. Similar microtensile bond strength results were obtained for teeth subjected to artificial ageing in 10% NaOCl for 5 h at room temperature and for teeth stored in artificial saliva for 6 months at 37°C. The additional etching step increased the microtensile bond strength for Adper Easy Bond and iBond SE. This study supports the use of one-step adhesives on etched dentine because of the increased bond strength compared with their application onto smear-layer-covered dentine, regardless of storage conditions.     

Shear bond strength of seventh generation bonding agents on dentin of primary teeth--an in vitro study

This controlled, randomized, in vitro study evaluated the shear bond strength of several seventh generation bonding agents on the dentin of primary teeth. Six different adhesives were used: Xeno IV, Clearfil S3 Bond, Adper Prompt-L-Pop, AdheSE One, Bond Force, and Optibond (control). Ninety primary teeth were prepared by wet grinding with a 320-grit silicon carbide paper on a polishing wheel running at 110 RPM. After 24 hours of storage in water, shear bond strengths of each group were determined. The mean shear bond strength of the tested adhesive systems to primary dentin was 12.27 MPa. One-way ANOVA testing showed a statistically significant difference between adhesive products (P < 0.001). Tukey HSD post hoc tests were used to assess which means were significantly different from one another. There was no statistically significant difference between the fifth generation adhesive system (Optibond) and the two seventh generation systems (Xeno IV and Bond Force), with Optibond exhibiting a lower mean shear bond strength compared to Bond Force. Within the limitations of this study, there is a significant difference between seventh generation bonding materials. Bond Force and Optibond appear to exhibit higher shear bond strengths than the other products.