Storage stability of solutions of pyruvic acid/glycine used in adhesive bonding

The rate of deterioration of pyruvic acid/glycine solutions used as common pretreatment of enamel and dentin in the Gluma bonding technique was investigated. Bond strengths between composite resin and enamel/dentin were measured. The bonds were mediated by pyruvic acid/glycine solutions, applied from 0 to 6 months after the time of manufacture. Bond strengths to enamel varied between 8.6 and 13.5 MPa and to dentin between 6.2 and 18.0 MPa. The pH of the solutions rose slightly during the experimental period, but no statistically significant change in bond strengths was observed.     

Adhesion to dentin by means of Gluma resin

Abstract – In its present version, the Gluma system for bonding restorative resin to dentin involves the application of an enamel bonding agent prior to the composite resin. Conceivably, pretreating the dentin with solutions of amino acids, and incorporating camphorquinone and selected methacrylic monomers into the Gluma adhesive would nullify the need for the enamel bonding agent. A bond strength to dentin of 13.4 MPa was obtained in the control experiment. Using a solution of pyruvic acid and glycine as pretreatment, and an optimized adhesive mixture containing glutaraldehyde, HEMA, BIS-GMA, camphorquinone, and water, bond strengths to dentin of 14.5 MPa and to enamel of 23.3 MPa were obtained. Thus, the new Gluma bonding system gave acceptable bond strengths without the prior application of enamel bonding agents.     

Adhesion to dentin by means of Gluma resin

In its present version, the Gluma system for bonding restorative resin to dentin involves the application of an enamel bonding agent prior to the composite resin. Conceivably, pretreating the dentin with solutions of amino acids, and incorporating camphorquinone and selected methacrylic monomers into the Gluma adhesive would nullify the need for the enamel bonding agent. A bond strength to dentin of 13.4 MPa was obtained in the control experiment. Using a solution of pyruvic acid and glycine as pretreatment, and an optimized adhesive mixture containing glutaraldehyde, HEMA, BIS-GMA, camphorquinone, and water, bond strengths to dentin of 14.5 MPa and to enamel of 23.3 MPa were obtained. Thus, the new Gluma bonding system gave acceptable bond strengths without the prior application of enamel bonding agents.     

Effect of acidic pretreatment on adhesion to dentin mediated by Gluma

Tensile bond strengths between dentin and a typical restorative resin were measured after the dentin was treated with Gluma. Solutions of phosphoric, pyruvic, nitric, or oxalic acid, also containing various amino acids, were used as pretreatments. Without amino acids in the solutions, the pretreatments conferred bonds of low strength. Use of acidic solutions containing glycine or N-phenylglycine was found to give bonds of high strength to both dentin and enamel.     

Five-year study of cervical erosions restored with resin and dentin-bonding agent.

The cumulative retention rate of a microfilled resin in non-undercut cervical abrasion/erosion lesions was studied over a 5-yr period. The enamel was etched and the dentin was pretreated with either Gluma (n = 75) or the first marketed version of Scotchbond (n = 30). The cumulative 5-yr retention rate of the Gluma fillings was 90% and that of the Scotchbond fillings 47% (the 95% confidence limits were 83-98% for Gluma fillings and 27-67% for Scotchbond fillings). The retention rate with both bonding agents was significantly higher in the maxillary arch than in the mandibular arch.     

In vitro shear bond strength of self-etching adhesives in comparison to 4th and 5th generation adhesives

PURPOSE: To determine the shear bond strength (SBS) of different established (Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N: RA, Prompt L-Pop III: PLP) and experimental (AC-Bond: AC, AC-Bond + Desensitizer: ACD) self-etching adhesives in comparison to fourth (Optibond FL: FL) and fifth generation (Excite: EX, Gluma Comfort Bond: CB) adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All adhesives were applied on flat enamel and dentin surfaces and light cured following manufacturers' directions. Tetric Ceram A2 composite cylinders 3.5 mm in diameter and 2.0 mm in height were sheared off (1 mm/min) after thermocycling (5 to 55 degrees C, 5000x). The t-test (5% level, Bonferroni-correction) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: SBS in enamel: RA: 27.0+/-5.8 MPa, PLP: 15.9+/-3.4 MPa, AC: 28.1+/-4.4 MPa, ACD: 22.2+/-4.1 MPa, FL: 33.2+/-3.2 MPa, EX: 30.5+/-5.1 MPa, CB: 30.1+/-3.7 MPa. SBS in dentin: RA: 25.8+/-5.7 MPa, PLP: 20.7+/-2.9 MPa, AC: 27.0+/-4.5 MPa, ACD: 20.7+/-3.7 MPa, FL: 34.4+/-3.8 MPa, EX: 30.0+/-4.6 MPa, CB: 27.9+/-2.6 MPa. FL resulted in significantly (p < 0.002) higher SBS in enamel and dentin than RA, AC, ACD, and PLP, and in higher SBS to dentin than CB. In enamel and dentin, RA performed significantly superior to PLP, but was not different from AC and ACD. EX and CB were both on the same level of significance as AC and RA, but showed superior results to ACD and PLP (enamel and dentin). PLP resulted in significantly lower SBS values in enamel and dentin than all the other materials investigated, except ACD in dentin, to which it was equivalent. CONCLUSION: Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N and AC-Bond were not significantly different than established 5th generation products. AC-Bond + Desensitizer and Prompt L-Pop have significantly different SBS from established 4th and 5th generation products. Future studies are required to investigate marginal integrity to determine if self-etching adhesives are an adequate alternative to one- and multi-bottle systems.     

Topographical characteristics and shear bond strength of tooth surfaces cut with a laser-powered hydrokinetic system.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Erbium lasers, specifically Er;YAG and Er, Cr;YSGG that emit in the near red wavelengths, cut both enamel and dentine. Bonding to these cut surfaces with composites has not been assessed for all laser systems. PURPOSE: This investigation assessed the shear bond strength of composite bonded to tooth structure treated with an Er,Cr;YSGG-powered hydrokinetic system (HKS, Millennium system) and then was compared with surfaces treated with a carbide bur. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Extracted human molars were cut into enamel and dentin with both systems. Nonetched and acid-etched subgroups were evaluated. Shear bond strength was measured with an Instron test machine with a knife-edge loading head. In addition, SEMs were evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in shear bond strength between etched bur cut (23.3 +/- 2.5 MPa), etched laser-cut enamel (23.7 +/- 4.5 MPa), and nonetched laser-cut enamel (20.5 +/- 2.8 MPa). For nonetched enamel, bond strength values for laser-cut surfaces were significantly higher than the bur-cut surfaces (8.7 +/- 4.3 MPa). Bond strength differences for dentin between bur (14.3 +/- 1.7 MPa) and laser cuts (11.5 +/- 4.3 MPa) were not significant (P =.03). SEM revealed that laser cutting of enamel did not cause formation of a smear layer. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in shear bond strength between etched bur-cut, etched laser-cut, and nonetched laser-cut enamel. With nonetched enamel, bond strength values for nonetched laser-cut surfaces were significantly higher than for the bur-cut surfaces. No bond strength differences between bur and laser cutting existed for dentin. Similar topography was observed for bur and laser prepared surfaces of etched enamel and nonetched dentin.     

Effect of solvent type on microtensile bond strength of a total-etch one-bottle adhesive system to moist or dry dentin

This study evaluated the effect of organic solvent (acetone or ethanol) on the microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) of an adhesive system applied to dry and moist dentin. Sixteen extracted human third molars were ground to expose a flat occlusal dentin surface and acid etched for 20 seconds (20% phosphoric acid gel, Gluma Etch 20 Gel, Heraeus/Kulzer). After rinsing the acid etchant, an ethanol-based one-bottle adhesive system was applied to the mesial half of the occlusal dentin surface. An acetone-based, one-bottle adhesive system was applied to the distal half of the ground dentin surface. The teeth were randomly assigned to groups. In Group 1, the etched dentin was thoroughly air dried and an ethanol-based one-bottle adhesive system was applied (Gluma Comfort Bond, Heraeus/Kulzer) (GCB). In Group 2, the etched dentin was thoroughly air dried and an acetone-based one-bottle adhesive system was applied (Gluma One Bond, Heraeus/Kulzer)(GOB). In Group 3, excess moisture was removed after acid etching, leaving a moist dentin surface and a one-bottle ethanol-based adhesive was applied (Gluma Comfort Bond). In Group 4, excess moisture was removed after acid etching, leaving a moist dentin surface and an acetone-based adhesive was applied (Gluma One Bond). A hybrid resin composite (Venus, Heraeus/Kulzer) was applied to the bonded surface in four 1-mm increments and light cured according to manufacturer's directions. The specimens were then sectioned with a slow-speed diamond saw in two perpendicular directions to obtain sticks with a cross-section of 0.5 +/- 0.05 mm2. The microtensile bond strength (MTBS) test was performed with a Bencor device in an Instron machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute. The data were subjected to a two-way ANOVA and Scheffé Post hoc test (p < 0.05). The experimental MTBS measured for dry dentin were Group 1 = 37.0 +/- 10.6 and Group 2 = 34.7 +/- 9.0 in MPa (mean +/- SD); and on moist dentin, Group 3 = 50.7 +/- 11.0 and Group 4 = 38.5 +/- 10.5 in MPa (mean +/- SD). The ethanol based adhesives resulted in higher MTBS than acetone-based adhesive (p < 0.008) and bonding to moist dentin resulted in higher MTBS (p < 0.001). GCB applied on moist dentin resulted in statistically higher bond strengths than the other groups. The highest MTBS were achieved with the use of an ethanol-based adhesive to moist dentin.     

Five-year study of cervical erosions restored with resin and dentin-bonding agent

The cumulative retention rate of a microfilled resin in non-undercut cervical abrasion/erosion lesions was studied over a 5-yr period. The enamel was etched and the dentin was pretreated with either Gluma ( n = 75) or the first marketed version of Scotchbond ( n = 30). The cumulative 5-yr retention rate of the Gluma fillings was 90% and that of the Scotchbond fillings 47% (the 95% confidence limits were 83–98% for Gluma fillings and 27–67% for Scotchbond fillings). The retention rate with both bonding agents was significantly higher in the maxillary arch than in the mandibular arch.     

In-vitro Shear Bond Strength of Self-etching versus Traditional Adhesives for Orthodontic Luting

OBJECTIVE: To determine the enamel shear bond strength (SBS) of various established (Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N [RA], Prompt L-Pot III [PLP]) and experimental (AC-Bond [AC], AC-Bond + Desensitizer [ACD]) self-etching adhesives in comparison to fourth (Total Etch, Primer and Bonding have separate liquids; OptiBond FL [FL]) and fifth-generation (Total Etch, Primer and Bonding "One Bottle"; Excite [EX], Gluma Comfort Bond [CB]) adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All adhesives were applied on flattened human enamel surfaces following the manufacturers' instructions and light-cured using a quartz-tungsten-halogen curing device. 3.5 x 2.0 mm Tetric Ceram A2 composite cylinders were sheared off (Zwick Universal-testing-machine 1445, 1 mm/min) after thermocycling (5-55 degrees C, 5000x). Normal distribution was tested for all groups and analysis of variance was conducted. The t-test (5% level, Bonferroni-correction) was used for statistical analysis to evaluate intergroup differences. RESULTS: Shear bond strength in enamel: Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N: 27.0 +/- 5.8 MPa, Prompt L-Pop III: 15.9 +/- 3.4 MPa, AC-Bond: 28.1 +/- 4.4 MPa, AC-Bond + Desensitizer: 22.2 +/- 4.1 MPa, OptiBond FL: 33.2 +/- 3.2 MPa, Excite: 30.5 +/- 5.1 MPa, Gluma Comfort Bond: 30.1 +/- 3.7 MPa. OptiBond FL demonstrated significantly higher SBS (p < 0.002) in enamel than Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N, AC-Bond, AC-Bond + Desensitizer and Prompt L-Pop III. Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N performed significantly better than Prompt L-Pop III, but did not differ from AC-Bond or AC-Bond + Desensitizer. The SBS values of Excite and Gluma Comfort Bond were both on the same level of significance as AC-Bond and Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N, but the former showed superior results to AC-Bond + Desensitizer and Prompt L-Pop III. Prompt L-Pop III yielded significantly lower SBS-values than all the other products evaluated. CONCLUSION: Resulcin Aqua Prime & Monobond N and AC-Bond did not differ significantly from established 5th-generation products. Further in-vivo studies are required to investigate intra-oral stability and resistance against changing forces and force directions.     

Parameters affecting in vitro bond strength of composites to enamel and dentin

In vitro tensile bond strengths of Photo Clearfil Bright (PB) and Clearfil Photo Posterior (CP) with Clearfil Photo Bond to human enamel and dentin were determined by a truncated cone bond test. Parameters tested were: four substrates (etched enamel; unetched dentin, D1; dentin conditioned with 10% polyacrylic acid, D2; and dentin etched with phosphoric acid, D3); two techniques (bonding agent prepolymerized, and bonding agent and composite polymerized together); and two storage times in 37 degrees C water (one day and one week). Bond strengths of PB and CP to enamel ranged from 15 to 25 MN/m2 and 19 to 24 MN/m2, respectively. Bond strengths of PB to dentin ranged from 10.2 to 13.6 MN/m2 for D1, 8.2 to 10.5 MN/m2 for D2, and 5.5 to 7.8 MN/m2 for D3. Bond strengths of CP to dentin ranged from 7.6 to 12.3 MN/m2 for D1, 6.8 to 9.5 MN/m2 for D2, and 4.6 to 6.7 MN/m2 for D3. Bond strengths were higher to enamel than to dentin. The highest bond strengths to dentin were to unetched dentin, followed by conditioned dentin, and then etched dentin. Polymerization techniques and storage times did not affect the bond strengths.     

Phosphoric acid as a dentin etchant.

This study determined the effect of phosphoric acid (H3PO4) application to dentin on the shear bond strength (SBS) and microleakage of an experimental bonding system. Thirty human maxillary permanent first and second molars were used for the SBS evaluation. In 15 of the teeth the Dentin Conditioner was applied to dentin for 30 seconds (A), while in the remaining 15 teeth the smear layer was removed by the application of a 37% H3PO4 gel for 20 seconds (B). The Primers 1 and 2 were mixed and applied to the conditioned dentin followed by the application of the Dentin Bonding Resin prior to the placement in three increments of the Bisfil-M composite. The specimens were stored in physiological saline at 37 degrees C for 24 hours prior to applying a shear load at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm. inch-1 in an Instron machine. Shear bond strengths were expressed in MPa. Circular Class V preparations were made on the roots of 30 maxillary permanent canines, 15 restored using the Dentin Conditioner (C) and 15 by removing the smear layer with the H3PO4 gel (D). Microleakage of the restorations was determined quantitatively by means of a spectrophotometric method. The quantitative microleakage was expressed as microgram dye/restoration. The data were analyzed by the Student t-test. The following results were obtained: A: 14.2 +/- 2.2 MPa; B: 7.2 +/- 4.2 MPa; C: 30.0 +/- 28.6 micrograms dye/restoration; (D) 10.3 +/- 8.2 micrograms dye/restoration. Removing the smear layer with H3PO4 reduced the SBS to dentin but decreased the quantitative microleakage significantly.     

Microtensile bond strengths of composite to dentin treated with desensitizer products

PURPOSE: This study was designed to analyze the influence of desensitizing procedures on dentin bond strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty bovine incisors were used, divided into four groups (n = 10): G1: control; G2: Gluma Desensitizer (Heraeus Kulzer); G3: Oxa-Gel (Art-Dent); G4: low-intensity laser (MMOptics). The buccal surface was wet ground flat with 180-, 400- and 600-grit silicon carbide abrasive paper to expose midcoronal dentin and create a uniform surface. After the application of the desensitizing agents to the exposed dentin, the specimens were etched with 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s, and an adhesive (Single Bond) was applied and light cured. A 4-mm high crown of composite resin (Filtek Z250) was then built up. Specimens were trimmed to an hourglass shape with cross sections of 1 mm2. Each specimen was individually fractured by a microtensile testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data, recorded in MPa, were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and the Duncan test (p = 0.05). RESULTS: Specimens treated with dentin desensitizers (except Gluma) yielded significantly lower mean bond strengths than nontreated control specimens. The mean values in MPa (+/- SD) were: G1: 13.4 (6.2); G2: 13.2 (4.8); G3: 7.15 (4.3); G4: 7.21 (4.6). CONCLUSIONS: Among the desensitizing agents studied, only Gluma Desensitizer did not detrimentally influence the bond strength values. It is a useful material for dentin desensitization.     

Shear bond strength of acetone-based one-bottle adhesive systems

The aim of this study was to assess the shear bond strength of four acetone-based one-bottle adhesive systems to enamel and dentin, and compare to that of an ethanol-based system used as control. Fifty human molars were bisected mesiodistally and the buccal and lingual surfaces were embedded in acrylic resin using PVC cylinders. The buccal surfaces were ground to obtain flat dentin surfaces, while the lingual surfaces were ground to obtain flat enamel surfaces. All specimens were polished up to 600-grit sandpapers and randomly assigned to 5 groups (n=20; 10 dentin specimens and 10 enamel specimens), according to the adhesive system used: One-Step (Bisco); Gluma One Bond (Heraeus Kulzer); Solobond M (Voco); TenureQuik w/F (Den-Mat) and OptiBond Solo Plus (Kerr) (control). Each adhesive system was applied according to the manufacturers' instructions. The respective proprietary hybrid composite was applied in a gelatin capsule (d=4.3 mm) and light-cured for 40 s. The specimens were tested in shear strength with an Instron machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min. Bond strengths means were analyzed statistically by one-way ANOVA and Duncan's post-hoc (p< or =0.05). Shear bond strength means (MPa) (+/-SD) to enamel and dentin were: Enamel: One-Step=11.3(+/-4.9); Gluma One Bond=16.3(+/-10.1); Solobond M=18.9(+/-4.5); TenureQuik w/F=18.7(+/-4.5) and OptiBond Solo Plus=16.4(+/-3.9); Dentin: One-Step=6.4(+/-2.8); Gluma One Bond=3.0(+/-3.4); Solobond M=10.6(+/-4.9); TenureQuik w/F=7.8(+/-3.9) and OptiBond Solo Plus=15.1(+/-8.9). In enamel, the adhesive systems had statistically similar bond strengths to each other (p>0.05). However, the ethanol-based system (OptiBond Solo Plus) showed significantly higher bond strength to dentin than the acetone-based systems (p< or =0.0001). In conclusion, the solvent type (acetone or ethanol) had no influence on enamel bond strength, but had great influence on dentin bonding, which should be taken into account when choosing the adhesive system.     

An in vitro comparison of acid etched vs. nonacid etched dentin bonding agents/composite interfaces over primary dentin

The purpose of this study was to evaluate acid etchant penetration on dentin bonding agents and its effect on the composite resin bond strength. Forty primary molars were mounted, then the buccal and lingual surfaces were prepared into dentin. The teeth were divided into four groups of 10, and four dentin bonding agents were placed on the buccal and lingual surfaces of exposed dentin, as recommended by the manufacturers. One surface of each tooth was etched randomly for 60 sec with 35% phosphoric acid. A standardized tube of composite resin was placed on each dentin surface and polymerized for 60 sec. The tubes were sheared off with an Instron Testing Machine. The specimens then were sectioned to be examined by a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Results demonstrated shear strengths (kg/cm2) of etched (e) and unetched (u) bonding agents to be: Scotchbond (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN) (e) 116.7 +/- 37.7, (u) 116.7 +/- 63.0; Scotchbond 2 (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN) (e) 112.0 +/- 40.6, (u) 127.0 +/- 38.7; Gluma (Bayer Dental, Leverkusen, Federal Republic of Germany) (e) 80.1 +/- 21.7, (u) 107.0 +/- 16.6; Bondlite (Kerr Manufacturing Co., Romulus, MI) (e) 53.4 +/- 34.7, (u) 79.1 +/- 26.3. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated a statistical significance in variance at the P less than 0.001 level. Scheffe's Test indicated no statistically significant differences between the bond strengths of etched vs. nonetched dentin bonding agents and composite resin. SEM evaluation indicated that the acid etchant penetrated none of the dentin bonding agents.     

Shear bond strength of current adhesive systems to enamel, dentin and dentin-enamel junction region

This study investigated the bonding of current resin adhesives to the region approximating the dentin-enamel junction (DEJ), where the etch pattern to enamel or dentin may be different. Three kinds of tooth substrates were chosen for testing: enamel, dentin and the DEJ region. A self-etching primer system (Clearfil SE Bond) and two total-etch wet bonding systems (Single Bond and One-Step) were used. Each tooth region was bonded with one of the adhesive systems, and a resin composite and was subjected to a micro-shear bond test. In addition, morphological observations were performed on debonded specimens and etched surfaces using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). CLSM observations showed that the DEJ region was etched more deeply by phosphoric acid gel than enamel or dentin, suggesting that the action of acid etch seemed to be more intense on the DEJ. However, no statistically significant differences of shear bond strength values were observed between the DEJ region and enamel or dentin, or the adhesive systems used (p>0.05). Bonding to the DEJ is potentially as good as that to enamel or dentin.     

Effect of dentin primer on shear bond strength of composite resin to moist and dry enamel

The etched enamel-composite resin bond is the most reliable bond known to us. Moisture and dentin primers are the two most important variables that can interfere with this bond. This study investigated the effect of dentin primer on bond strengths of composite resin to moist and dry enamel. One hundred freshly extracted molar teeth were used for shear bond strength testing. The teeth were mounted in phenolic rings with an approximal enamel surface exposed. The exposed enamel surface on each tooth was flattened using 320- 400- and 600-grit silicon carbide papers and etched using 34-38% phosphoric acid gel. The teeth were then divided into 10 groups (n = 10). Four groups were assigned to each of the two dentin bonding systems, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose and OptiBond FL. Two groups were assigned to the single-bottle bonding agent (Single Bond). Each bonding system was tested on moist and dry enamel. OptiBond FL and Scotchbond MP were tested with and without the use of primer. All samples were thermocycled and tested in shear. Fracture analysis was performed using a binocular microscope. For scanning electron microscopy, approximal samples of enamel (1 mm thick) were flattened, etched, and bonded with and without primer on moist and dry enamel. A 1 mm-thick layer of Z100 was bonded to the specimens, which were then immersed in 10% HCl for 24 hours to dissolve the enamel. The specimens were viewed under a scanning electron microscope. Results indicated that the use of primer on dry enamel did not significantly affect (P > 0.05) shear bond strengths for the two bonding systems, Scotchbond MP (primed 24.10 +/- 4.83 MPa, unprimed 29.57 +/- 7.49 MPa) and OptiBond FL (primed 26.82 +/- 4.44, unprimed 25.66 +/- 2.95). However, the use of primer was found to be essential on moist enamel to obtain acceptable bond strengths with both Scotchbond MP (primed 25.61 +/- 10.29 MPa, unprimed 3.26 +/- 0.95 MPa) and OptiBond FL (primed 30.28 +/- 3.49 MPa, unprimed 8.37 +/- 3.31 MPa). Moisture on enamel did not significantly affect (P > 0.05) bond strengths for the single-bottle bonding agent, Single Bond (moist enamel 31.34 +/- 9.03 MPa, dry enamel 27.93 +/- 5.41 MPa). Fracture analysis revealed that most fractures were adhesive or mixed, with a greater percentage being cohesive for the groups with dry enamel or with primer on moist enamel. Scanning electron micrographs corroborated the shear bond strength data. The specimens without primer on moist enamel showed very poor penetration of adhesive and composite resin into the etched enamel microporosities.     

The influence of fiber reinforcement of composites on shear bond strengths to enamel

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Fiber-reinforced composites (FRC) are used in direct intra-oral applications as periodontal splints and chairside tooth replacement by bonding them to etched enamel with resin adhesives and composites. There is little information regarding the effect of FRC on the shear bond strength of composite to etched enamel. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of resin preimpregnated and non-preimpregnated fiber-reinforced composites on enamel to composite shear bond strength (SBS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Specimen groups (n = 12) consisted of a control (composite with no fiber reinforcement), Ribbond, Splint-It Unidirectional, Splint-It Woven, and Connect, which were bonded to 37% phosphoric acid etched Prime and Bond NT adhesive-treated bovine enamel surfaces on a bed of Tetric Flow composite. Specimens were thermocycled 1000 times between 5 degrees and 55 degrees C and loaded on a universal testing machine in shear at a linear increasing load until fracture (MPa). The fractured surfaces of the debonded specimens were evaluated to determine the nature of the fracture with a light binocular microscope (x10). Shear bond strength data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student-Newman-Kuels tests (P <.05). RESULTS: Mean MPa +/- SD for the test groups were as follows: Control, 15.6 +/- 2.4; Splint-It Unidirectional, 15.3 +/- 2.4; Splint-It Woven, 16.5 +/- 1.8; Connect, 18.8 +/- 1.5; and Ribbond, 15.8 +/- 2.2. The Connect FRC group had significantly higher (P <0.05) enamel SBS than all other groups. Fracture analysis showed varying types of failures among the groups, with cohesive fractures within the fiber reinforcement of Splint-It Unidirectional and Connect, cohesive fractures within the bonding resin/flowable composite for Ribbond and the control, and adhesive fracture at the fiber reinforcement interface with Splint-It Woven. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, no differences in SBS were observed with the addition of 3 of the 4 FRCs compared to composite without FRC, with the exception of the Connect product which provided significantly higher SBS values.     

The effect of dentin desensitizer on shear bond strength of conventional and self-adhesive resin luting cements after aging

This study tested the impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the shear bond strength (SBS) of two conventional (RelyX ARC, Panavia 21) and two self-adhesive (RelyX Unicem, G-Cem) resin luting cements after water storage and thermocycling. Human third molars (N=880) were embedded in acrylic resin. The buccal dentin was exposed. Teeth were randomly divided into four main groups, and the following cements were adhered: 1) RelyX ARC, 2) Panavia 21, 3) RelyX Unicem, and 4) G-Cem. In half of the teeth in each group, dentin was treated with Gluma Desensitizer. In the conventional cement groups, the corresponding etchant and adhesive systems were applied. SBS of the cements was tested after 1 hour (initial); at 1, 4, 9, 16, and 25 days of water storage; and at 1, 4, 9, 16, and 25 days of thermocycling. SBS data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); this was followed by the post hoc Scheffé test and a t-test. Overall, the highest mean SBS (MPa) was obtained by RelyX ARC (ranging from 14.6 ± 3.9 to 17.6 ± 5.2) and the lowest by Panavia 21 in combination with Gluma Desensitizer (ranging from 0.0 to 2.9 ± 1.0). All tested groups with and without desensitizer showed no significant decrease after aging conditions compared with baseline values (p>0.05). Only the Panavia 21/Gluma Desensitizer combination showed a significant decrease after 4 days of thermocyling compared with initial values and 1 day thermocycling. Self-adhesive cements with Gluma Desensitizer showed increased SBS after aging conditions (ranging from 7.4 ± 1.4 to 15.2 ± 3) compared with groups without desensitizer (ranging from 2.6 ± 1.2 to 8.8 ± 2.9). No cohesive failures in dentin were observed in any of the test groups. Although self-adhesive cements with and without desensitizer presented mainly adhesive failures after water storage (95.8%) and thermocyling (100%), conventional cement (RelyX ARC) showed mainly mixed failures (90.8% and 89.2%, after water storage and thermocyling, respectively). Application of the Gluma Desensitizer to dentin before cementation had a positive effect on the SBS of self-adhesive cements.     

Shear bond strength of light-cured glass ionomer to enamel and dentin

The shear bond strengths of a light-cured glass-ionomer cement to enamel and dentin were determined with use of extracted human maxillary permanent canines and molars. Bonding sites on the ground, etched enamel and ground dentin surfaces were demarcated by the punching of a hole, 3 mm in diameter, in an adhesive tape. The mixed glass-ionomer cement was transferred to the demarcated site, cured by exposure to visible light for 30 s, and the cement surface treated with Scotchprep Dentin Primer followed by Scotchbond 2 Light Cure Dental Adhesive. The embedded teeth were positioned in an assembly apparatus, and Silux composite was bonded to the glass-ionomer-cement surfaces. The specimens were disassembled after 15 min and subjected to a shear load (in an Instron machine) immediately after disassembly; after storage in water at 37 degrees C for 24 h, without and with temperature cycling; and after storage in water for four weeks, without and with temperature cycling. The shear bond strength of the glass-ionomer cement to etched enamel was in the order of 12 MN.m-2, and to dentin it was 9 MN.m-2. Temperature cycling and duration of storage had no adverse effect on the shear bond strength. The enamel and dentin aspects of fractured test specimens were examined, and the percentage of the bonding area that failed in the cement was estimated. Most of the test specimens failed partly at the enamel and dentin interfaces and within the glass-ionomer cement.