Shear bond strength of four core materials to dentin bonded with light-cured or dual-cured adhesive

PURPOSE: To measure and compare the shear bond strength of four core materials to dentin bonded with one adhesive (Prime and Bond NT) that was either light-cured or dual-cured. METHODS: The dentin of 80 freshly extracted molars was exposed using a series of abrasive disks. The teeth were divided into eight equal groups, etched with phosphoric acid for 15 seconds and rinsed. Dentin was dried to a moist surface. On 40 teeth, Prime and Bond NT was applied and light-cured for 30 seconds. On 40 teeth, Prime and Bond NT was mixed with the self-cure additive, which was applied to the dentin, and light-cured for 20 seconds. The core materials were then placed following manufacturers' directions onto the cured adhesive. The core material was light-cured, when it was necessary, for 60 seconds and stored for 24 hours in water at room temperature. The specimens were loaded in shear in the Instron until failure at a 5 mm/minute crosshead speed. Data were compared using two factor ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test (P = .05). RESULTS: Both curing mode and core material showed a significant difference. A significant difference between mean shear bond strength for dual and light cured was observed only in CompCore (P = 0.0002). There was no statistical difference when Prime and Bond NT dual-cured was used with chemical- or dual-cured materials.     

Longevity of bonds made by composite and polyacid-modified resins to dentin using a dual-cured adhesive system

PURPOSE: To evaluate the microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) of a dual-cured dentin adhesive bonded to dentin using a light-cured resin-based composite (composite) or a polyacid-modified resin-based composite (compomer), and to investigate the effect of water aging on the bond strengths of these systems. METHODS: Flat dentin surfaces prepared from extracted human third molars were bonded with Prime&Bond NT Dual-Cured version (PBNT). Resin build-up crowns were constructed incrementally with two different materials: a composite (Z250) or a compomer (Dyract AP). When Dyract AP was used as the restorative material, half of the specimens were etched with 36% phosphoric acid, and the other half of the specimens were not etched. After storage in water for 24 hours or for 6 months, the teeth were sectioned to obtain bonded 1.3 mm2 beams containing the bonded interface. Each beam was tested in tension in an Instron machine at 0.5 mm/minute. Results were analyzed by multiple ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison tests. RESULTS: The group PBNT/Dyract AP bonded to acid-etched dentin showed the highest bond strength, in the 24-hour evaluation. Bond strength values decreased significantly after aging. The groups treated with PBNT in light-cured, dual-cured and self-cured modes performed equally well in the 24-hour evaluation. After 6 months of water aging, bond-strengths of the light-cured groups remained stable. By contrast, decreases in the bond strengths of the self-cured groups were observed.     

Bond strengths of nonrinsing adhesives.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine enamel and dentin bond strengths of a nonrinsing "all-in-one" adhesive and of a nonrinsing conditioner combined with a 1-bottle adhesive. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Specimens were obtained from 240 bovine teeth ground to expose enamel or dentin surfaces. Ten enamel and 10 dentin specimens were randomly assigned to each of 12 different combinations of adhesive system (Prompt L-Pop; no etch + Prime & Bond NT; NRC + Prime & Bond NT; 36% phosphoric acid + Prime & Bond NT; no etch + Prime & Bond 2.1; 36% phosphoric acid + Prime & Bond 2.1) and restorative material (resin composite; polyacid-modified resin composite ["compomer"]). After the application of the adhesive system, a No. 5 gelatin capsule filled with the restorative material was seated against the enamel or dentin surface. After 24 hours in distilled water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were thermocycled and the shear bond strengths were measured. RESULTS: For resin composite, etching with phosphoric acid resulted in the highest bond strengths to enamel. For compomer, the highest enamel bond strengths were achieved with both phosphoric acid and Prompt L-Pop. Treating dentin with Prime & Bond NT without etching provided the highest mean bond strength for composite. For compomer, treating dentin with Prime & Bond NT resulted in the highest mean bond strengths, regardless of the conditioner. CONCLUSION: Compomer and resin composite exhibited statistically similar bond strengths. Bond strengths to dentin were significantly lower than those to enamel.     

Contraction stress and bond strength to dentinfor compatible and incompatible combinations of bonding systems and chemical and light-cured core build-up resin composites.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have shown that adhesives containing acidic monomers combined with composites can adversely effect the polymerization reaction producing low bond strengths. This phenomenon may also occur in making composite build-ups, jeopardizing one of the key factors for a successful core build-up restoration. The aim of this study was to investigate the contraction stress development and bond strength to dentin of core build-up resin composites combined with adhesives of various acidities. In addition the hypothesis tested was that light irradiation through chemical-cured composites during curing does not influence contraction stress or bond strength to dentin. METHODS: The chemical-cured (Clearfil Core) and light-cured (Clearfil Photo Core) core build-up resin composites were combined with two light-cured adhesives, Clearfil SE Bond (pH=1.8) and One-Step Bond (pH=4.3) and two dual-cured adhesives, Clearfil Photo Bond (pH=2.5) and All-Bond 2 (pH=6.1). Contraction stress development (at C=3) was determined for a period of 30 min in a universal testing machine where the opposing bonding surfaces were glass and dentin. After the 30 min period, the specimens were loaded in tension to determine the bond strength to dentin. To test the hypothesis, the combinations of the chemical-cured composites with the four bonding systems were also light irradiated for 40s right at the start of curing. RESULTS: For all composite-adhesive combinations tested, the adhesion to dentin resisted the developing polymerization contraction stresses. Both, dentin as a substrate to bond at and the use of adhesives, were showed to play an important role in keeping the contraction stresses low. The chemical-cured composite (Clearfil Core) combined with the light-cured adhesive SE Bond (pH=1.8) showed for both contraction stress and bond strength significant lower values than the other combinations. The hypothesis was accepted for combinations of the chemical-cured composite with All-Bond 2 and One-Step Bond, but was not supported by combinations with Clearfil SE Bond or Clearfil Photo Bond, as a significant increase in contraction stress was found. The higher values found for bond strength were not significant. SIGNIFICANCE: Besides combinations of chemical-cured core build-up composites with light or dual-cured adhesives as recommended by the manufacturer, also combinations with adhesives of other manufacturers are compatible, provided that the pH is higher than approximately 4.3. Chemical-cured core build-up composites combined with light-cured adhesives with a pH as low as 1.8 lead to a significantly lower stress and bond strength compared to other combinations. Light irradiation during curing through a combination of a chemical-cured composite and a low pH adhesive reactivates polymerization.     

Effect of cyclic loading on the microtensile bond strengths of total-etch and self-etch adhesives

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of mechanical loading on the microtensile bond strength (MTBS) of five adhesive systems to dentin. METHODS: Flat dentin surfaces from human molars were divided into five groups and bonded with total-etch self-priming adhesives (Single Bond, Prime&Bond NT and Prime&Bond XP), two-step self-etching primer (Clearfil SE Bond) and an all-in-one adhesive (Etch&Prime 3.0), according to the manufacturers' instructions. Composite build-ups were constructed incrementally with Tetric Ceram. After 24 hours of water storage, half the specimens were load cycled (5000 cycles, 90 N). The teeth were then sectioned into beams of 1.0 mm2 cross-sectional area. Each beam was tested in tension in an Instron machine at 0.5 mm/minute. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Student Newman Keuls multiple comparisons tests (p<0.05). Results: Clearfil SE Bond and Single Bond attained higher MTBS than the other three adhesives. Prime&Bond NT and Prime&Bond XP performed equally, and Etch&Prime 3.0 resulted in the lowest MTBS. After mechanical loading, MTBS decreased in all groups except Prime&Bond XP. Clearfil SE Bond, Single Bond and Prime&Bond XP obtained higher MTBS than Prime&Bond NT. Specimens bonded with Etch&Prime 3.0 resulted in premature failures and MTBS could not be measured. Clinical RELEVANCE: When using Etch&Prime 3.0, bond structures did not withstand mechanical loading, which may have an influence on the long-term success of restorations. If dentin is acid-etched, alcohol-based adhesive systems showed higher bond strength after mechanical loading.     

Effect of dentin conditioning on dentin permeability and micro-shear bond strength

The purpose of this study was to compare fluid flow rates across dentin surfaces treated with four conditioners. The effect of conditioning on the micro-shear bond strengths of glass ionomer cement (Fuji IX GP) and resin-based adhesives (Single Bond 2 or Clearfil SE Bond) were also investigated. Under a simulated pressure of 1.3 kPa, two dentin conditioners, phosphoric acid, and a self-etching primer were applied to the dentin surfaces. Dentinal fluid flows at baseline and after conditioning were recorded for 15 min each. The conditioned surfaces were examined using a scanning electron microscope. The micro-shear bond strengths of the glass ionomer cement and of the resin-based adhesives bonded to conditioned dentin surfaces were evaluated while simulated intrapulpal pressure was maintained at 0 or 1.3 kPa. Only the dentin surface etched with phosphoric acid showed a significant increase in permeability. Micro-shear bond strengths of Fuji IX GP were not affected by conditioning the dentin surfaces or by bonding at different intrapulpal pressures (0 or 1.3 kPa). The effects on bond strengths of resin-based adhesives depended on the system used. The simulated positive intrapulpal pressure during bonding significantly affected the adherence of Single Bond 2, whereas Clearfil SE Bond was unaffected.     

Effects of Different Re-Wetting Techniques on Dentin Shear Bond Strengths

Purpose: For contemporary hydrophilic resin adhesive systems, bonding to dentin is improved if the substrate is maintained in a hydrated state following acid‐etching. The purpose of this study was to compare the dentin shear bond strengths of two single‐bottle adhesives (one acetone‐based and one ethanol‐based) applied under different etched‐dentin conditions: dry, wet, or dry and re‐wetted with different solutions. Materials and Methods: Bovine incisors (N = 120) were mounted in acrylic, polished to 600‐grit, and randomly assigned to 12 groups (n = 10). Dentin was etched for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid, rinsed, and either blot‐dried, air‐dried, or air‐dried and re‐wetted with different solutions (distilled water, Gluma Desensitizer, Aqua‐Prep, and 5% glutaraldehyde in water). Two adhesives (Single Bond and Prime & Bond NT) were applied to each of the surface conditions following manufacturers' instructions. After adhesive application and curing, composite was applied in a No. 5 gelatin capsule and light‐cured. Specimens were loaded in shear, using an Instron at 5 mm per minute. Shear bond strengths were calculated by dividing the failure load by the bonded surface area. Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a post hoc Tukey test. Results: Mean shear bond strengths ranged from 12.5 to 26.6 MPa for Single Bond and from 5.6 to 14.7 MPa for Prime & Bond NT. Significant differences were found in both groups of materials (p < .001). The three highest mean bond strengths were obtained (in order) on dentin that was re‐wetted with Gluma Desensitizer, re‐wetted with Aqua‐Prep, or never dried. Differences between these surface conditions were not statistically significant for either material. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Different dentin surface conditions and re‐wetting techniques affected bond strengths for adhesives studied. Aqua‐Prep and Gluma Desensitizer can be successfully used as re‐wetting agents. The use of a re‐wetting agent may be beneficial when dentin is dried after acid‐etching and rinsing.     

Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems (Solid Bond, EBS-Multi, PermaQuik, One Coat Bond, Gluma One Bond, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V) and their respective fracture modes. METHODS: Superficial occlusal dentin of extracted human molars was exposed, finished with wet 600-grit silicon carbide paper, and a block of resin composite bonded with the above adhesives according to the manufacturers' instructions. The teeth were kept in tap water for 24 h at 37 degrees C, sectioned to obtain three or four bar-shaped specimens, which were then shaped to an hour-glass form of 1.2 +/- 0.02 mm diameter. The specimens were stressed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until rupture of the bond. The mean bond strengths were compared using one-way ANOVA and LSD tests. The frequency of fracture modes was compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. RESULTS: Mean microtensile bond strengths ranged from (17.8 +/- 7.0) MPa for Solid Bond to (36.0 +/- 8.1) MPa for Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. The bond strength of Clearfil Liner Bond 2V and PermaQuik (30.8 +/- 8.5 MPa) were not significantly different, and were higher than all other materials. Bond strengths of Solid Bond (17.8 +/- 7.0) MPa, EBS-Multi (18.7 +/- 5.0) MPa, One Coat Bond (21.9 +/- 5.6) MPa, and Gluma One Bond (23.4 +/- 5.2) MPa were not significantly different. SEM examination indicated that Solid Bond, EBS-Multi and One Coat Bond showed no significant difference in failure modes but were significantly different from PermaQuik, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. SIGNIFICANCE: The self-etching primer system, Clearfil Liner Bond 2V, provided the simplest bonding technique, and together with PermaQuik exhibited greatest bond strength to dentin.     

Bond strength of self-etching primers to enamel and dentin of primary teeth.

PURPOSE: The objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the tensile bond strength of three self-etching primers to human primary enamel and dentin. METHODS: Forty (40) freshly extracted primary molars were sectioned bucco-lingually and embedded in self-curing acrylic resin with the facial or lingual surfaces exposed. The specimens were wet ground to 600 grit SiC paper to expose a flat enamel or dentin surface. The materials tested were: Prompt L-Pop (LP2, ESPE), Clearfil SE Bond (CSE, Kuraray America), Etch and Prime 3.0 (EP, Degussa) anda control, Prime and Bond NT (NT, Dentsply/Caulk). The adhesive systems were applied according to the manufacturers' instructions. An inverted, truncated cone of composite (Pertac II, ESPE) with a 2-mm bonding diameter was cured using a polytetrafluoroethylene jig. The specimens were debonded in tension using a universal testing machine (Instron) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. RESULTS: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed significant differences existed between the four systems and two surfaces. To enamel of primary teeth, Prime and Bond NT had significantly higher bond strength (25.9 MPa) than when bonding with the three acidic primers Prompt L-Pop (18.5 MPa), Etch and Prime 3.0 (19.3 MPa) and Clearfil SE Bond (18.7 MPa). Complete bond failures occurred with Prompt L-Pop and Etch and Prime 3.0 to dentin of primary teeth. With a mean of 39 Mpa, the bond strength to dentin of primary teeth with Clearfil SE Bond was significantly higher than with Prime and Bond NT (12.5 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this in vitro study show that the four adhesive systems tested bonded effectively to enamel of primary teeth, but only CSE achieved adequate bond strengths to dentin of primary teeth.     

Influence of conditioning time on enamel adhesion.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to calculate enamel bond strengths of 4 self-etch adhesives in function of conditioning time. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty proximal surfaces of 30 extracted human molars were roughened and assigned to 4 self-etch adhesives: AdheSE (Ivoclar Vivadent), Adper Prompt L-Pop (3M Espe), Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray America), and Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus (Bisco). Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply) was used as the total-etch control. For 30 surfaces, the adhesives were applied per the manufacturers' directions. For the remaining 30, enamel was conditioned for twice the time recommended by the manufacturer. Buildups were constructed with Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE). Bonded specimens were sectioned in sticks and tested to tensile failure. Data were analyzed with 2-way ANOVA and Duncan's test at P < .05. The pH of the self-etch solutions and the phosphoric acid gel was measured with a pH meter. A correlation coefficient was computed to measure the linear association between pH and bond strengths. RESULTS: Tyrian SPE and Prime & Bond NT, the adhesives whose acidic conditioners yielded the lowest pH, ranked in the highest subset regardless of application time. AdheSE and Clearfil SE Bond, which had the highest pH, were the only adhesives for which double application time resulted in statistically higher bond strengths than the recommended time. When means were pooled for application time, Tyrian SPE and Prime & Bond NT resulted in bond strengths that were significantly higher than those of the remaining adhesives. AdheSE resulted in statistically lower bond strengths than any other adhesive. A significant correlation was found between pH and mean bond strengths. CONCLUSION: Doubling the enamel conditioning time might increase bond strengths for specific self-etch adhesives.     

Bonding to enamel and dentin using self-etching adhesive systems.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effectiveness of three different dentin adhesive systems on the adhesion of resin composite to both dentin and enamel. METHOD AND MATERIALS: The flat dentin and enamel surfaces of 60 extracted human molar teeth were exposed by wet grinding with 600-grit silicon carbide paper. One total-etch self-priming adhesive system (Prime & Bond NT), one two-step self-etching primer adhesive system (Clearfil SE Bond), and one "all-in-one" self-etching adhesive system (Prompt L-Pop) were evaluated. Each bonding system was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions and followed by composite (TPH Spectrum) application. Twenty-four hours after bonding, the teeth were subjected to shear testing. There were 10 replicates for each group. RESULTS: Prompt L-Pop exhibited significantly higher bond strength values to enamel (27 +/- 4.2 MPa) than all other groups. There were no statistically significant differences for shear bond strength to dentin among adhesives. Prompt L-Pop showed the statistically significantly higher bond strength to enamel than dentin. There were no statistically significant differences between the enamel and dentin bond strengths of Clearfil SE Bond and Prime & Bond NT. CONCLUSIONS: The self-etching adhesive systems produced high bond strengths to human coronal dentin and ground enamel surfaces. These materials seem to be very promising for further clinical applications, and the results are very encouraging for the clinical success of these simplified adhesive systems. The self-etching adhesive systems produced even better bond strengths to both enamel and dentin than conventional total-etch systems, especially the "all-in-one" system, which produced the highest bond strength to enamel.     

Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: effect on postoperative sensitivity

BACKGROUND: Self-etching adhesives are believed to prevent postoperative sensitivity when used under posterior resin-based composite restorations. The authors tested a twofold hypothesis: a self-etch, or SE, adhesive would result in less postoperative sensitivity than a total-etch, or TE, adhesive; an SE adhesive would result in poorer enamel marginal integrity than a TE adhesive. METHODS: Patients were selected on the basis of requiring Class I and II restorations in molars and premolars. The authors placed 30 restorations with the SE material (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray America, New York) and 36 restorations with Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del.), which uses 34 percent phosphoric acid to etch enamel and dentin simultaneously. Preparations were of standard design, with all margins in enamel without beveling. Upon rubber dam isolation, the authors conditioned the enamel and dentin walls with the self-etching primer (for Clearfil SE Bond) or etched with the proprietary 34 percent phosphoric acid (for Prime & Bond NT), followed by application of the corresponding dentin adhesive. Teeth were restored with the proprietary hybrid resin-based composite indicated for posterior restorations: Clearfil AP-X for Clearfil SE Bond or Esthet-X Micro Matrix Restorative for Prime & Bond NT. The restored teeth were evaluated preoperatively and at two weeks, eight weeks and six months postoperatively for sensitivity to cold (ice), air and masticatory forces, as well as for marginal discoloration. RESULTS: Analysis of variance revealed no statistically significant differences in postoperative sensitivity between the SE and TE materials at any recall time. Marginal discoloration was rated as "absent" for all restorations at six months. Only one tooth displayed sensitivity to occlusal forces at six months. CONCLUSION: The SE adhesive did not differ from the TE adhesive in regard to sensitivity and marginal discoloration. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Postoperative sensitivity may depend on the restorative technique rather than on the type of dentin adhesive used.     

Effects of different re-wetting techniques on dentin shear bond strengths

PURPOSE: For contemporary hydrophilic resin adhesive systems, bonding to dentin is improved if the substrate is maintained in a hydrated state following acid-etching. The purpose of this study was to compare the dentin shear bond strengths of two single-bottle adhesives (one acetone-based and one ethanol-based) applied under different etched-dentin conditions: dry, wet, or dry and re-wetted with different solutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bovine incisors (N = 120) were mounted in acrylic, polished to 600-grit, and randomly assigned to 12 groups (n = 10). Dentin was etched for 15 seconds using 35% phosphoric acid, rinsed, and either blot-dried, air-dried, or air-dried and re-wetted with different solutions (distilled water, Gluma Desensitizer, Aqua-Prep, and 5% glutaraldehyde in water). Two adhesives (Single Bond and Prime & Bond NT) were applied to each of the surface conditions following manufacturers' instructions. After adhesive application and curing, composite was applied in a No. 5 gelatin capsule and light-cured. Specimens were loaded in shear, using an Instron at 5 mm per minute. Shear bond strengths were calculated by dividing the failure load by the bonded surface area. Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a post hoc Tukey test. RESULTS: Mean shear bond strengths ranged from 12.5 to 26.6 MPa for Single Bond and from 5.6 to 14.7 MPa for Prime & Bond NT. Significant differences were found in both groups of materials (p < .001). The three highest mean bond strengths were obtained (in order) on dentin that was re-wetted with Gluma Desensitizer, re-wetted with Aqua-Prep, or never dried. Differences between these surface conditions were not statistically significant for either material.     

Influence of activation mode of dual-cured resin composite cores and low-viscosity composite liners on bond strength to dentin treated with self-etching adhesives

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of light- or chemical initiation on the polymerization reaction of dual-cured composite core buildup materials (CM) with respect to their shear bond strength to dentin treated with self-etching adhesives (SE), in the presence or absence of a low-viscosity composite liner (LI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two SEs (Clearfil SE Bond and Unifil Core Bond), their respective CMs (DC Core Paste and Unifil Core), and a LI (Protect Liner F) were tested. After removing the labial enamel surfaces of 8 bovine incisors, each flat dentin surface was sectioned into 4 pieces with similar surface areas (30 mm2). The dentin surfaces were wet abraded with 600-grit SiC paper and randomly divided into 8 groups. Experimental groups comprised the use of a SE and its respective CM with or without an intermediate application of the LI and with or without CM light activation. Three cylinders of CM (0.5 mm high and 0.75 mm in diameter) were applied to each bonded dentin surface (n = 12), using a tygon tubing mold. After water storage for 24 h, specimens were subjected to microshear testing. Data were statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%). RESULTS: For both SEs, LI application and CM light activation showed significantly higher bond strengths than the groups in which an intermediate LI was not used or the CMs were only chemically cured. CONCLUSION: The bond strength of CM to dentin using SE is reduced if the LI and light activation are not employed.     

Effects of adhesive liner and provisional cement on the bond strength of nickel/chrome/beryllium alloy cemented to dentin.

OBJECTIVE: Treating teeth with adhesive agents before placing a provisional restoration can prevent tooth sensitivity. This study evaluated the bond strength of resin cements to dentin treated with 2 adhesive agents and 2 provisional cements. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Extracted human molars were prepared by exposing dentin and were treated with either Prime & Bond NT or Clearfil SE Bond. After a simulated impression technique, the teeth were provisionalized with either a eugenol or noneugenol temporary cement. Teeth were cleaned for bonding by either mechanical removal of the cement or use of an acid conditioner. Panavia F and Calibra resin cements were used to cement nickel/chrome/beryllium alloy to the tooth surfaces, and the specimens were debonded. Mean shear bond strengths for each group were calculated. RESULTS: Mean shear bond strengths ranged from 26.6 +/- 5.8 MPa for Calibra bonded to dentin treated with Prime & Bond NT, a noneugenol cement, and mechanically cleaned, to 10.6 +/- 4.4 MPa for Panavia F bonded to unlined (no adhesive) dentin treated with a eugenol cement and mechanically cleaned. Of the 14 groups tested, significant differences were observed related to the adhesives and resin cements. Both temporary cements reduced the bond to dentin not treated with a resin adhesive. Use of an acid conditioner for cleaning the temporary cement also reduced bond strengths in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of a dentin adhesive before provisionalization may prevent the temporary cement from affecting the bond of the final resin cement to the tooth. For the products used in this study, use of phosphoric acid to clean the tooth surface is not recommended.     

Effect of solvent and rewetting time on dentin adhesion.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the influence of solvent and rewetting time on microtensile dentin bond strengths of four dentin adhesives. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Sixty human molar specimens were divided into four dentin adhesive treatment groups: (1) a water-based total-etch dentin adhesive, EBS Multi; (2) an ethanol-based total-etch adhesive, Excite; (3) an acetone-based total-etch adhesive, Prime & Bond NT; and (4) an ethanol- and water-based total-etch adhesive, Single Bond. For each dentin adhesive, three specimens were assigned to five dentin moisture conditions. Specimens were tested in the tensile mode. RESULTS: When adhesives were applied to moist dentin, bond strengths varied from 26.2 MPa for Prime & Bond NT to 29.5 MPa for Single Bond without any statistical differences. When applied to dentin that had been dried for 15 seconds, Prime & Bond NT and Excite resulted in the lowest mean bond strengths, but they were statistically similar to each other (7.9 and 8.3 MPa, respectively). Single Bond resulted in a mean bond strength of 12.7 MPa, which was significantly lower than that of EBS Multi (24.1 MPa). For the latter, all mean bond strengths were statistically similar when some amount of moisture was present on the surface. For the other three adhesives, mean bond strengths returned to the range obtained on moist dentin only when dentin was rewet for 30 seconds. CONCLUSION: Bond strengths upon rewetting depend on the type of solvent in the bonding system, and rewetting time.     

aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives part ii. etching effects on unground enamel

Objective : The purpose of this study was to investigate the etching efficacy of three self‐etching primers on unground enamel by (1) examining the etched surface using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and (2) evaluating the microtensile bond strengths of these self‐etching primers to unground enamel using either their manufacturers' adhesive or a control resin. Materials and Methods : Three self‐etching systems were evaluated in this study: Clearfil® SE Bond (Kuraray Co. Ltd, Osaka, Japan), Non‐Rinse Conditioner® (NRC; Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany), and Prompt L‐Pop® (ESPE, Seefeld, Germany). All‐Bond® 2 (Bisco Inc., Schaumburg, IL, USA), a total‐etch adhesive system, was used as a control. Buccal surfaces of human bicuspids were conditioned using either a self‐etching primer or 32% phosphoric acid for SEM examination of the conditioned enamel. The self‐etching materials were rinsed with an ascending series of ethanol. For TEM examination, each adhesive system was used according to its manufacturer's instructions. Unground enamel treated with NRC was bonded using Prime & Bond NT® (Dentsply DeTrey). Uninfiltrated enamel was then completely dissolved, and resininfiltrated replicas were assessed for the extent of penetration of the adhesives into the enamel. For microtensile bond strength evaluation, specimens were assigned to two groups. The first group was conditioned and bonded according to each manufacturer's instructions. In the second group the conditioned enamel surfaces were rinsed with ethanol to remove the self‐etch primer and then were primed and bonded using the control primer and resin adhesive. Resin composite (Z100®, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) was applied in 2 mm increments. The first resin composite increment was light‐cured using the pulse delay technique, followed by conventional light‐activation of subsequent increments. Specimens were sectioned into uniform 0.96 mm² beams and were subjected to tensile stress until failure. Results : The etching pattern and the subsurface hybrid layer morphology revealed by SEM and TEM varied by system. Clearfil SE Bond had the mildest etching pattern, whereas Prompt L‐Pop had an etching pattern similar to that of 32% phosphoric acid. When adhesive systems were used as directed, the mean microtensile bond strengths of the three self‐etching adhesive systems were not significantly different from one another, but they were significantly lower than that of the control group (10–14 MPa vs 27 MPa). When bonding specimens with the control adhesive resin, the mean microtensile bond strengths of NRC with Prime & Bond NT and Prompt L‐Pop were not significantly different from those of the control group, but all were significantly higher than that of Clearfil Mega SE Bond. Conclusions : The self‐etching primers evaluated in this study had significantly lower microtensile bond strengths to unground enamel than did a total‐etch system. There was no relationship between the etching efficacy of the adhesive systems and the microtensile bond strength.     

Effect of surface conditioning and restorative material on the shear bond strength and resin-dentin interface of a new one-bottle nanofilled adhesive.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of different combinations of surface conditioning (DeTrey Conditioner 36, NRC, no etching) and restorative materials (Dyract AP, Spectrum TPH) on the shear bond strength of Prime and Bond NT to enamel and dentin, and to characterize the resin-dentin interface produced by these combinations. METHODS: Shear bond strength was tested on 30 enamel and 30 dentin flat labial surfaces of extracted bovine teeth. The enamel and dentin specimens were randomly assigned to six groups of five teeth each and treated using different combinations of surface conditioners and restorative materials with Prime and Bond NT. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) observation of argon-ion-etched specimens was done to evaluate the resin-dentin interface. RESULTS: The type of surface conditioning and restorative material had significant effects on dentin bond strengths. Etching the dentin prior to application of Prime and Bond NT significantly increased bond strength and caused formation of a hybrid layer for Spectrum TPH. For Dyract AP, dentin etching generally did not improve bond strength despite the formation of a hybrid layer. On enamel, Prime and Bond NT had consistently high bond strengths on etched specimens. SIGNIFICANCE: The results showed that Dyract AP and Spectrum TPH, when used with Prime and Bond NT have different bonding mechanisms and the effect of surface conditioning on their shear bond strength differs. Clinicians should be aware of these effects in order to optimize bonding.     

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.     

Effect of polymerization mode of adhesive and cement on shear bond strength to dentin

PURPOSE: To investigate the shear bond strength to dentin when two resin adhesive systems in light-cure, dual-cure, and auto-cure modes were used with three resin cements. This was done to determine the degree of compatibility that exists when resin products with different polymerization mechanisms are used together. METHODS: Three hundred non-carious human molars were divided into 30 test groups in which Prime & Bond NT and ScotchBond Multi-Purpose were used as adhesives with Calibra, Nexxus and Variolink cements to attach Rexillium III posts to flattened dentin surfaces. Debonding was achieved with an Instron testing machine and mean shear bond strengths were determined for each test group. The data were subjected to three-way ANOVA and post-hoc LSD testing to determine whether significant differences existed between the test groups. RESULTS: Bond strengths achieved were affected by the adhesive, the cement, and the cement curing mode. In general, the auto-cure application of the three cements demonstrated reduced shear bond strengths, both with respect to the different adhesives and their curing modes as well as compared to the dual-cure technique of the same cement. Additionally, Prime & Bond NT demonstrated considerably more variability than ScotchBond Multi-Purpose when used with both dual-cure and auto-cure varieties of the three cements. The bond strengths of resin cements depend on the curing mode of the cement and the adhesive. Unlike with direct light-cured resin composites, combining adhesive systems and dual-cured resin cements from different manufacturers may be contraindicated.