Clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 2 years

A 2-year randomized, controlled prospective study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive and a “gold-standard” three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious Class-V lesions. The null hypothesis tested was that the one-step self-etch adhesive does perform clinically equally well as the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. A total of 161 lesions in 26 patients were restored with Clearfil AP-X (Kuraray). The restorations were bonded either with the “all-in-one” adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray) or with the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Optibond FL (Kerr). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months, 1 and 2 years, regarding their retention, marginal adapation, marginal discoloration, caries occurrence, preservation of tooth vitality and post-operative sensivity. Retention loss, severe marginal defects and/or discoloration that needed intervention (repair or replacement) and the occurrence of caries were considered as clinical failures. The recall rate at 2 years was 93.8%. Only one Clearfil S3 Bond restoration was lost at the 2-year recall. All other restorations were clinically acceptable. The number of restorations with defect-free margins decreased severely during the 2-year study period (to 6.7% and 25.3% for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL, respectively). The Clearfil S3 Bond restorations presented significantly more small marginal defects at the enamel side than the Optibond FL restorations (Clearfil S3 Bond: 93.3%; Optibond FL: 73.3%; p = 0.000). Superficial marginal discoloration increased in both groups (to 53.3% and 36% for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL, respectively) and was also more pronounced in the Clearfil S3 Bond group (p = 0.007). After 2 years, the simplified one-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond and the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Optibond FL were clinically equally successful, even though both adhesives were characterized by progressive degradation in marginal integrity. Clearfil S3 Bond exhibited more small enamel marginal defects and superficial marginal discolorations.

     

Bond strength of glass-ceramics on the fluorosed enamel surfaces

OBJECTIVES: Effect of different adhesive luting systems on the shear bond strength of IPS Empress 2 ceramic restorations to fluorosed enamel surface was investigated. METHODS: Forty-eight ceramic discs (2 mm x 3 mm; IPS Empress 2) were fabricated. Twenty-four non-carious extracted human molar teeth with fluorosis and 24 without fluorosis were cleaned with pumice using a plastic brush and then they were divided into two main groups. The IPS Empress 2 ceramic discs were luted to the teeth of four subgroups with two different adhesive luting systems, Variolink 2/Excite DSC (etch-and-rinse) and Clearfil Esthetic Cement/ED Primer II (self-etch), thermocycling was performed 5000 times. Shear bond strengths were tested using Shimadzu Universal Testing Machine until failure. An optical microscope and image analyzer were used at 10x and 1000x magnification to analyze the surfaces for adhesive, cohesive and mixed failure percentages. Data was analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey test at a significance level of p<0.05. RESULTS: Mean shear bond strength data of the groups in MPa were; Variolink 2/Excite DSC on fluorosed enamel: 18.3+/-3.08, Variolink 2/Excite DSC on non-fluorosed enamel: 18.79+/-2.65, Clearfil Esthetic Cement/ED Primer II on fluorosed enamel: 8.43+/-2.45, Clearfil Esthetic Cement/ED Primer II on non-fluorosed enamel: 13.53+/-1.68. Mixed failure was the most prevalent type of failure in moderate fluorosed and non-fluorosed teeth with etch-and-rinse dentin bonding system, and in fluorosed teeth with self-etch dentin bonding system. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an etch-and-rinse adhesive luting procedure produced higher bond strengths of glass-ceramics bonded to fluorosed and non-fluorosed enamel surfaces than the self-etch bonding system.     

Durability of enamel bonding using two-step self-etch systems on ground and unground enamel

This study examined the early and long-term microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) and interfacial enamel gap formation (IGW) of two-step self-etch systems to unground and ground enamel. Resin composite (Filtek Z250) buildups were bonded to proximal enamel surfaces (unground, bur-cut or SiC-treated enamel) of third molars after the application of four self-etch adhesives: a mild (Clearfil SE Bond [SE]), two moderate (Optibond Solo Plus Self-Etch Primer [SO] and AdheSE [AD]) and a strong adhesive (Tyrian Self Priming Etchant + One Step Plus [TY]) and two etch-and-rinse adhesive systems (Single Bond [SB] and Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus [SBMP]). Ten tooth halves were assigned for each adhesive. After storage in water (24 hours/37 degrees C), the bonded specimens were sectioned into beams (0.9 mm2) and subjected to microTBS (0.5 mm/minute) or interfacial gap width measurement (stereomicroscope at 400x) either immediately (IM) or after 12 months (12M) of water storage. The data were analyzed by three-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha=0.05). No gap formation was observed in any experimental condition. The microTBS in the Si-C paper and diamond bur groups were similar and greater than the unground group only for the moderate self-etch systems (SO and AD). No reductions in bond strength values were observed after 12 months of water storage, regardless of the adhesive evaluated.     

Bonding of acid-etch and self-etch adhesives to human fluorosed dentine

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our laboratory study was to determine the bonding efficacy of two-step self-etching primer system (Clearfil SE Bond), all-in-one adhesive (Clearfil Tri S Bond) and acid-etching system (Single Bond) to human fluorosed dentine. METHODS: Forty-eight human molars were grouped according to modified Thylstrup-Fejerskov index (TFI) into normal (N, TFI 0), mild fluorosis (ML, TFI 1-3) and moderate fluorosis (MD, TFI 4-6). Superficial dentine was exposed and ground with 600-grit silicon carbide paper. Teeth of each group were randomly divided into three sub-groups. Each sub-group was treated with one of the three bonding systems. A resin composite was built up on the bonded surfaces and stored in water at 37 degrees C for 24h. They were serially sectioned in buccal-lingual direction into 0.7-1.0mm thick slabs. Slices were trimmed for microtensile bond test and stressed in tension at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min. The data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA (p=0.05). The adhesive/dentine interfaces of the bonded specimens were examined by a FE-SEM. RESULTS: Significantly higher microtensile bond strength (microTBS) was found with Clearfil SE Bond to mild fluorosed dentine than did Single Bond and Clearfil Tri S Bond. Lower microTBS were found for Single Bond (not significant) and Clearfil Tri S Bond than Clearfil SE Bond with moderately fluorosed dentine. Thickness of the hybrid layer produced by Clearfil SE Bond in mild and moderately fluorosed groups was less than with normal dentine. CONCLUSION: Two-step self-etching system, Clearfil SE Bond, showed a higher bonding performance to fluorosed dentine than Single Bond and Tri S Bond.     

Does the acidity of self-etching primers affect bond strength and surface morphology of enamel?

PURPOSE: This study examined the ultrastructure and microtensile bond strengths (TBS) of self-etching (with different acidity) and conventional adhesive systems bonded to unground enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Resin composite (Filtek Z250) buildups were bonded to unground enamel surfaces of third molars after adhesive application with the following materials: Clearfil SE Bond (CSE); Optibond Solo Plus Self-Etch (OP); Tyrian Self Priming Etching (TY), and the controls Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus (SBMP) and Single Bond (SB). Six teeth were assigned to each material. After storage in waterfor 24 h at 37 degrees C, the bonded specimens were sectioned into beams of approximately 0.8 mm2 and subsequently subjected to microTBS testing at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The average values were subjected to one-way ANOVA (alpha = 0.05). The effect of surface conditioning of each material was observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS: The highest resin-enamel bond strength was observed for SBMP (22.7 +/- 5.2) and SB (26.7 +/- 5.2 MPa). The lowest mean bond strengths were 10.9 +/- 3.2 and 7.8 +/- 1.5 MPa for TY and OP, respectively. CSE showed an intermediate performance (18.7 +/- 4.6 MPa). An overall increase in porosity was evident along the entire enamel surface treated with the self-etching primers; however, no selective demineralization similar to that with 35% phosphoric acid was observed. CONCLUSION: The highest bond strength means and the more retentive etching pattern were observed for the two-step etch-and-rinse adhesives. Among the self-etching systems studied, Clearfil SE Bond should be preferred.     

One-day bonding effectiveness of new self-etch adhesives to bur-cut enamel and dentin

Self-etch adhesives try to solve difficulties commonly associated with the clinical application of etch-and-rinse adhesives. Their application procedure is considered less time-consuming and, more importantly, less technique-sensitive. The main objective of this study was to determine the bonding effectiveness to and the interaction with enamel/dentin of three contemporary one- and two-step self-etch adhesives by microtensile bond strength testing (microTBS), Fe-SEM and TEM when compared to a control two-step self-etch and a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. The one-step self-etch adhesive, Adper Prompt (3M ESPE), scored the lowest microTBS of all experimental and control adhesives tested. Conversely, the two-step self-etch adhesives Clearfil SE (Kuraray) and OptiBond Solo Plus Self-Etch (Kerr) approached the values obtained by the three-step etch-and-rinse control (OptiBond FL, Kerr) when bonded to enamel and dentin. Ultramorphological characterization showed that interfacial morphology and the pH of the self-etch primer/adhesive are strongly associated. The interaction with dentin varied from the formation of a submicron, hydroxyapatite-containing hybrid layer for the "mild" self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE to a 3-5 microm thick, hydroxyapatite-depleted hybrid layer for the "strong" self-etch adhesive Adper Prompt. The two-step self-etch adhesives AdheSE and OptiBond Solo Plus Self-Etch presented with a hybrid layer with a hydroxyapatite-depleted top part and a hydroxyapatite-containing base part and were therefore classified into a new group of self-etch adhesives, namely "intermediary strong" self-etch adhesives.     

Influence of Er,Cr:YSGG laser treatment on microtensile bond strength of adhesives to enamel

The current trend towards minimum-intervention dentistry has introduced laser technology as an alternative technique for cavity preparation. This study assessed the null hypothesis that enamel prepared either by Er,Cr:YSGG laser or conventional diamond bur is equally receptive to adhesive procedures. The buccal and lingual surfaces of 35 sound human molars were prepared with Er,Cr:YSGG laser or a medium-grit diamond bur. One etch&rinse (OptiBond FL) and three self-etch adhesives (Adper Prompt L-Pop, Clearfil SE Bond and Clearfil S3 Bond) were applied on laser-irradiated and bur-cut enamel, followed by the application of a 5-6 mm build-up of Z100. The micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS) was determined after 24 hours of storage in water at 37 degrees C. Prepared enamel surfaces and failure patterns were evaluated using a stereomicroscope and a field-emission-gun scanning electron microscope (Feg-SEM). The pTBS to laser-irradiated enamel was significantly lower than to bur-cut enamel (p<0.05), with the exception of Clearfil S3 Bond, which bonded equally effectively to both substrates. The latter presented the highest microTBS on laser-irradiated enamel, though it was not statistically different from the microTBS of OptiBond FL. SEM analysis revealed significant morphological alterations of the laser-irradiated enamel surface, such as areas of melted and recrystalized hydroxyapatite and deep extensive micro-cracks. In conclusion, the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to laser-irradiated enamel depends not only on the structural substrate alterations induced by the laser, but also on the characteristics of the adhesive employed.     

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.     

Aggressiveness of self-etch adhesives on unground enamel

Manufacturers of mild self-etch adhesives advocate the adjunctive use of phosphoric acid etching when bonding to unground enamel. This study tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the recently introduced, more aggressive self-etch adhesives and a total-etch adhesive in bonding to unground enamel. The ultrastructure and microtensile bond strengths (microTBS) of Xeno III (Dentsply) and Simplicity (Apex Dental Materials), bonded to unground enamel, were examined after thermocycling. Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray), a mild self-etch adhesive, was used as the negative control, and One-Step (BISCO), a total-etch adhesive bonded to phosphoric acid-etched unground enamel, was used as the positive control. Differences in the thickness of enamel hybrid layers were observed and the aggressiveness of apatite dissolution in the four adhesives.     

Micro-shear bond strength of two all-in-one adhesive systems to unground fluorosed enamel

The aim of this study was to evaluate the micro-shear bond strengths of two all-in-one adhesive systems to unground fluorosed enamel. Buccal surfaces of 24 normal and 24 moderately fluorosed teeth (Thylstrup and Fejerskov index, TFI=4-6) were bonded using G-Bond and Clearfil Tri-S Bond. The surfaces were then restored with a resin composite, stored for 24 hours in water, and tested for micro-shear bond strength (MSBS). Fracture modes, etching patterns, and adhesive interfaces were studied under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA, whereby no significant differences in MSBS were found among the four groups (p>0.05). Through SEM examination, it was shown that 1 microm of resin tag-like extensions had penetrated into the enamel for both adhesives at the enamel-adhesive interface. Based on the results obtained, it was concluded that MSBS was not influenced by the severity of fluorosis. Furthermore, there were no differences in enamel bond strength between G-Bond and Clearfil Tri-S Bond.     

Effect of cavity configuration and aging on the bonding effectiveness of six adhesives to dentin.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect polymerization contraction stress may have on bond durability. METHODS: Bonding effectiveness was assessed by micro-tensile bond strength testing (muTBS) and electron microscopy. The muTBS to flat dentin surfaces and in standardized cavities was determined (this after 1 day as well as 1 year water storage). Six adhesives representing all current classes were applied: two etch-and-rinse (OptiBond FL, Kerr; Scotchbond 1, 3M ESPE), two self-etch (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray; Adper Prompt, 3M ESPE) and two glass-ionomer (Fuji Bond LC, GC; Reactmer, Shofu) adhesives. RESULTS: The conventional 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive OptiBond FL bonded most effectively to dentin, and appeared insensitive to polymerization shrinkage stress and water degradation. The 2-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond most closely approached this superior bonding effectiveness and only slightly lost bond strength after 1-year water exposure. The 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Scotchbond 1 and the 'strong' 1-step self-etch adhesive Adper Prompt appeared very sensitive to cavity configuration and water-aging effects. The 2-step resin-modified glass-ionomer adhesive Fuji Bond LC only suffered from shrinkage stress, but not from 1-year water-exposure. Remarkable also is the apparent repairability of the 'mild' 1-step glass-ionomer adhesive Reactmer when stored for 1 year in water, in spite of the very low 1-day muTBS. SIGNIFICANCE: Simplified bonding procedures do not necessarily imply improved bonding performance, especially in the long term.     

Micro-tensile bond strength of two adhesives to Erbium:YAG-lased vs. bur-cut enamel and dentin

The purpose of the study was to assess the hypotheses that laser irradiation is equally effective for bonding as traditional acid-etch procedures, and that tooth substrate prepared either by Erbium:YAG laser or diamond bur is equally receptive to adhesive procedures. Buccal/oral enamel and mid-coronal dentin were laser-irradiated using an Erbium:YAG laser. A total-etch adhesive (OptiBond FL) applied with and without prior acid-etching and a self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) were employed to bond the composite. The micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS) was determined after 24 h of storage in water. Failure patterns were analysed using a stereo-microscope, and samples were processed for Field-emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (Fe-SEM) evaluation. Unbonded, lased enamel and dentin surfaces were evaluated using Fe-SEM as well. The total-etch adhesive bonded significantly less effectively to lased than to bur-cut enamel/dentin. Laser 'conditioning' was clearly less effective than acid-etching. Moreover, acid etching lased enamel and dentin significantly improved the microTBS of OptiBond FL. The self-etch adhesive performed equally to lased as to bur-cut enamel, but significantly less effectively to lased than to bur-cut dentin. It is concluded that cavities prepared by laser appear less receptive to adhesive procedures than conventional bur-cut cavities.     

Effect of water storage on the bonding effectiveness of 6 adhesives to Class I cavity dentin

Adhesive-dentin interfaces degrade with time. This study determined the effect water storage may have on the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to occlusal Class I cavity-bottom dentin. Six adhesives, all representing contemporary classes of adhesives, were applied: a 3-step (OptiBond FL, Kerr) and 2-step (Scotchbond 1*, 3M ESPE) etch-and-rinse adhesive, a 2-step (Clearfil SE, Kuraray) and 1-step (Adper prompt, 3M ESPE) self-etch adhesive and a 2-step (FujiBond LC, GC) and 1-step (Reactmer, Shofu) resin-modified glass-ionomer adhesive. Bonding effectiveness was assessed by microtensile bond strength testing (MTBS) and electron microscopy (Feg-SEM and TEM). The MTBS was determined after 1 day and 1 year water storage of the entire restored cavity (indirect exposure of the adhesive-dentin interface to water) and prepared microTBS-beams (direct exposure of the adhesive-dentin interface to water). The hypotheses tested were: (1) resin-dentin bonds formed at the bottom of Class I cavities resist 1-year water storage and (2) an adjacent composite-enamel bond protects the composite-dentin bond against degradation. Non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis statistically analyzed the microTBSs. The first hypothesis was rejected, as only the microTBS of OptiBond FL and Clearfil SE did not significantly decrease after 1-year direct and/or indirect water storage. The second hypothesis was corroborated, as the bonding effectiveness of most simplified adhesives (Scotchbond 1, Adper Prompt, FujiBond LC and Reactmer) approached 0 (because of the frequent pre-testing failures) after 1-year direct water exposure. The second hypothesis concluded that the 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive must still be regarded the "gold standard." Though microTBS decreased significantly, Clearfil SE, as a 2-step self-etch adhesive, was the only simplified adhesive to perform reliably after 1-year direct water exposure.     

Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional, one-step, and self-etching adhesive systems

OBJECTIVES: This in vitro study compared the dentin bonding performance of eight adhesive systems using a microtensile bond strength test. METHODS: Thirty bovine teeth were ground to 600-grit to obtain flat root-dentin surfaces. Two conventional adhesive systems (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus, OptiBond FL), four one-step adhesive systems (Scotchbond 1, Asba S.A.C., Prime and Bond NT, Excite) and two self-etching adhesive materials (Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V and Prompt L-Pop) were evaluated. Each bonding system was applied according to manufacturer's instructions and followed by composite (Z100) application. Immediately after bonding, the teeth were prepared for microtensile testing. Bond strength to dentin was measured using a Vitrodyne V-1000 universal tester. There were 14 replicates for each material. Fractured specimens were further observed by SEM. RESULTS: Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus exhibited significantly (p<0.05) higher bond strength values (30.3+/-9.4 MPa) than all other materials. The bond strengths of the other materials were (from highest to lowest): Opitbond FL (22.4+/-4.3 MPa); Scotchbond 1(18.9+/-3.2); Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V (18.9+/-3.0); Prime and Bond NT (18.3+/-6.9); Asba S.A.C. (14.4+/-2.9); Excite (13.8+/-3.7); and Prompt L-Pop (9.1+/-3.3). Statistical comparisons frequently overlapped, but Optibond was significantly (p<0.05) greater than Asba, Excite, and Prompt L-Pop; whereas, Scotchbond 1 was only significantly (p<0.05) greater than Prompt L-Pop. Asba, Excite and Prompt L-Pop were not significantly different. The fracture modes were mostly adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: The conventional adhesive systems produced higher bond strengths to root dentin than most one-step adhesives and one self-etching adhesive; with the exception of one material in each respective system.     

Influence of Er,Cr:YSGG laser treatment on the microtensile bond strength of adhesives to dentin

PURPOSE: In light of the concept of minimally invasive dentistry, erbium lasers have been considered as an alternative technique to the use of diamond burs for cavity preparation. The purpose of this study was to assess the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to Er,Cr:YSGG laser-irradiated dentin using irradiation settings specific for cavity preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four midcoronal dentin surfaces, obtained from sound human molars, were irradiated with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser or prepared with a diamond bur using a high-speed turbine. One etch-and-rinse (Optibond FL/Kerr) and three self-etching adhesives (Adper Prompt L-Pop/3M ESPE, Clearfil SE Bond/Kuraray, and Clearfil S3 Bond/Kuraray) were used to bond the composite to dentin. The microtensile bond strength (microTBS) was determined after 24 h of storage in water at 37 degrees C. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine pairwise statistical differences (p < 0.05). Prepared dentin surfaces, adhesive interfaces, and failure patterns were analyzed using a stereomicroscope and Field-emission gun Scanning Electron Microscopy (Feg-SEM). RESULTS: Significantly lower microTBS was observed to laser-irradiated than to bur-cut dentin (p < 0.05), irrespective of the adhesive employed. Feg-SEM photomicrographs of lased dentin revealed an imbricate patterned substrate and the presence of microcracks at the dentin surface. CONCLUSION: Morphological alterations produced by Er,Cr:YSGG laser-irradiation adversely influence the bonding effectiveness of adhesives to dentin.     

Effect of fracture strength of primer-adhesive mixture on bonding effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure the micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS) of two adhesives to dentin and to correlate this microTBS with the micro-tensile fracture strength (microTFS) of primer-adhesive mixtures of the two adhesives. METHODS: The three-step etch&rinse adhesive OptiBond FL (Kerr) and the two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) were used to bond Filtek Z100 (3M ESPE) to twenty mid-coronal dentin surfaces. The microTBS was determined at 1 and 24 h after light-curing. In addition, the microTFS of primer-adhesive mixtures (primer:adhesive=1:3 by weight) and of the pure adhesives (controls) were measured after the same time intervals. RESULTS: The microTBS to dentin of OptiBond FL at 24 h was significantly higher than at 1 h and than the microTBS of Clearfil SE Bond at 24 h. The mean microTFS of the primer-adhesive mixtures was always lower than the microTFS of the respective adhesives. The highest reduction in microTFS due to mixing primer with the adhesive resin was measured for Clearfil SE Bond. Both the microTFS of the primer-adhesive mixtures and the pure adhesives of OptiBond FL and Clearfil SE Bond increased with time. SIGNIFICANCE: The early 1 h microTBS to dentin was lower than the 24 h microTBS for OptiBond FL, but not for Clearfil SE Bond. Differences in polymerization efficiency as well as in the resulting interfacial strength may explain such varying early bond strengths to dentin.     

Microtensile bond strength of one- and two-step self-etching adhesives on sclerotic dentin: the effects of thermocycling

This study evaluated the effects of thermocycling on the microtensile bond strength (microTBS) of one- and two-step self-etch adhesives (SEAs) to sclerotic dentin. Two adhesives, Clearfil S3 Bond (S3), a one-step self-etch adhesive (1-SEA), and Clearfil SE Bond (SE), a two-step self-etch adhesive (2-SEA), were applied on cervical lesions in human premolars with sclerotic or normal dentin. After adhesive application, the lesions were restored and built up using a resin composite (Clearfil AP-X). After 24 hours in water storage, the restored teeth were sectioned into 0.7 x 0.7 mm composite-dentin beams. The beams were then aged with 0, 5,000 or 10,000 thermocycles. The use of two adhesives, two substrate types and three thermocycling regimens yielded 12 experimental groups of 14-19 beams each. The beams were subsequently subjected to microTBS testing at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute and statistical analyses were computed with three-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test at p < 0.05. Three-way ANOVA showed statistically significant effects on bonding effectiveness by lesion type, adhesive system, thermocycling or combinations of the adhesive system and thermocycling (p < 0.05). With sclerotic dentin, although S3 and SE provided comparable microTBS after 24 hours of water storage, S3 showed significantly lower microTBS than SE after thermocycling (p < 0.05). Regardless of lesion type, the microTBS for S3 decreased significantly after 5,000 or 10,000 thermocycles, while the microTBS for SE showed a significant decrease only after 10,000 thermocycles. Regardless of the extent of thermocycling, the microTBS values for either SE or S3 bonded to sclerotic dentin were significantly lower than to normal dentin (p < 0.05). The results suggested that thermocycling had a significant negative effect on the bond strength of the two SEAs tested. In contrast to 2-SEA, 1-SEA might not be a good choice for sclerotic dentin when seeking durability of the resin-dentin bond.     

Polymerization kinetics of dental adhesives cured with LED: correlation between extent of conversion and permeability.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the polymerization kinetics of different adhesive films in relation to their permeability after exposure to different LED curing units. METHODS: One adhesive from each class was analyzed: a three-step etch-and-rinse (OptiBond FL; Sybron-Kerr), a two-step etch-and-rinse (One-Step, Bisco), a two-step self-etch (Clearfil Protect Bond, Kuraray) and a one-step self-etch adhesive (Xeno III; Dentsply DeTrey). Adhesive films were prepared and cured with SmartLite IQ (Dentsply) or L.E.Demetron I (Demetron Kerr) up to complete curing. Polymerization kinetic curves of the tested adhesives were obtained with differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). In particular, total reaction time and extent of polymerization (Ep) at 20, 40 or 60s were compared. Permeability of the adhesive films was evaluated on flat dentin surfaces of human extracted teeth connected to a permeability device and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Total reaction time differed among the adhesives tested: OptiBond FL相似文献   

Fatigue of enamel bonds with self-etch adhesives

ObjectiveFatigue testing of adhesive bonds to tooth structures in conjunction with bond strength testing can provide more useful information for examining the effectiveness of dental adhesives. The purpose of this study was to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) and shear fatigue limit (SFL) of composite to enamel bonds using modern adhesive systems.MethodsTwelve specimens each were used to determine 24-h resin composite (Z100-3M ESPE) to enamel shear bond strengths with an etch-and-rinse system (ERA), Adper Single Bond Plus (SB), and four self-etch adhesives (SEA)—Adper Prompt-L-Pop (PLP), Clearfil SE (CSE), Clearfil S³ (CS3) and Xeno IV (X4). A staircase method of fatigue testing was used in a four-station fatigue cycler to determine the SFL of composite to enamel bonds with the adhesives (16–20 specimens for each adhesive) at 0.25 Hz for 40,000 cycles. ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test were used for the SBS data and a modified t-test with Bonferroni correction was used for comparisons of the SFL.ResultsThe SBS and SFL of the etch-and-rinse system were significantly greater (p < 0.05) than those of the four self-etch adhesives. The SBS and SFL of CSE were also significantly greater than for the other three self-etch systems. The ratio of SFL to SBS was highest with the etch-and-rinse system and the ratio became increasing smaller in the same order that the values for SBS decreased with the self-etch systems.SignificanceThe lower fatigue limits for composite to enamel bonds obtained with the self-etch adhesive systems may indicate that greater enamel margin breakdown will occur with restorations where these systems are used for bonding.     

不同牙本质粘结系统处理后的牙釉质表面及粘结界面扫描电镜观察

目的观察不同牙本质粘结系统处理牙釉质后,牙釉质表面和粘结界面的超微结构特点。方法选取人离体下第三磨牙14颗,湿性打磨颊面牙釉质。随机选择6颗牙,分别使用全酸蚀牙本质粘结系统Adper^TM Single Bond2（SB2）、一步法自酸蚀牙本质粘结系统Cleaxfil S^3Bond（CS3）和iBond GI（IB）与光固化复合树脂粘结牙釉质。硬组织切片,扫描电镜观察各粘结系统与牙釉质粘结界面形态特点。另8颗牙,随机分4组,对照组不再做任何处理,另3组分别用SB2的酸蚀剂（35％磷酸）、CS3和IB处理牙釉质表面,扫描电镜观察牙釉质表面形态特点。结果SB2的酸蚀剂酸蚀牙釉质表面后,脱矿明显,形成典型的蜂窝状结构;SB2粘结剂在牙釉质粘结界面形成密集的树脂突,长约5μm;CS3和IB对牙釉质的脱矿较弱,与牙釉质粘结界面无明显的树脂突形成。结论自酸蚀粘结系统CS3和IB与牙釉质粘结界面的超微结构和全酸蚀粘结系统SB2相比较存在明显差异。