No abstract

Background: Recent advances in enamel and dentine adhesive technology have resulted in the emergence of many new adhesive systems. Self-etching bonding systems do not require a separate etching step and the newest systems are the "all-in-one" systems which combine etching, priming and bonding into a single application. This study reports laboratory enamel microshear bond strengths of a self-etching priming and three all-in-one systems and also evaluates two different microshear bond test methods. Methods: One hundred and nineteen enamel specimens were bonded (0.8mm diameter) with either Clearfil Protect Bond (Kuraray), Xeno III (Dentsply), G Bond (GC) or One-Up Bond F (Tokuyama) using Palfique Estelite resin composite and stored in 37ºC water for seven days. The microshear bond test method used either a blade or wire to apply the shear stress. Results were analysed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc (Tukey) multiple comparison analysis. Results: Clearfil Protect Bond demonstrated higher and more consistent bond strengths than Xeno III, G Bond or One-Up Bond F. The wire method showed much greater reliability in results, with a coefficient of variation half that of the blade method. Conclusions: All-in-one adhesives seem to be less reliable than the two-step self-etching priming adhesive when bonding to enamel. Test method can significantly affect results in the microshear bond test method. Key words:Microshear bond test, all-in-one adhesives, self-etching priming adhesive, enamel, enamel bonding.Abbreviations and acronyms: ANOVA = analysis of variance; CEJ = cemento-enamel junction; DEJ = dentinoenamel junction; SEM = scanning electron micrograph.