Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems to Mineral Trioxide Aggregate with Different Time Intervals

Shear bond strength of a novel light cured calcium silicate based-cement to resin composite using different adhesive systems

“…The zone of weakened cement is therefore more likely to fail cohesively when debonded from resin, possibly resulting in lower bond strengths 40) . MTA exhibited higher bond strength to composite when using the etch and rinse system which is in agreement with previous studies 20,23,33) . The surface of MTA samples etched with phosphoric acid observed in previous studies 36,41) showed a crystalline structure that is eroded and cracked following phosphoric acid treatment.…”

“…Tunc et al 23) evaluated the bond strength of White MTA (WMTA) to a resin composite and a compomer using an etch and rinse system (Adaper™ Single Bond, 3M ESPE) and a 1-step self-etch adhesive system (Prompt L-Pop, 3M Dental Products, St Paul, MN, USA) after a 48 h storage of the MTA. The reported SBS values were higher than in the current study for both adhesive systems (13.22 and 10.73 MPa vs. 7.50 and 4.61 MPa respectively) similar to the findings by Atabek et al 33) . The difference in the reported values may be due to the smaller bonded area used by Tunc et al 23) and different 1-step self-etch adhesive used.…”

“…Oskoee et al 17) evaluated the SBS of MTA to Filtek Z250 using Single bond etch and rinse system. The results showed lower SBS compared with the current study (4.65 MPa vs. 7.50 MPa) which can be attributed to the shorter storage period allowed for MTA setting (24 h vs. 48 h in the current study), since it has been shown that acid etching procedures affected the hardness and strength of ProRoot MTA after mixing and may lead to displacement of MTA in a cavity and therefore affect its sealability 33,36) . In the current study, SBS of the conventional GIC to resin composite was lower than TheraCal LC but significantly higher than MTA.…”

“…On the other hand, the lack of resin content in MTA and conventional GIC indicates that their bond to resin composite is purely micromechanical 31) . Several studies evaluated SBS of resin composite to MTA compared with several pulp capping biomaterials bonded using different adhesive systems 20,21,23,[32][33][34] with variable results. Tunc et al 23) evaluated the bond strength of White MTA (WMTA) to a resin composite and a compomer using an etch and rinse system (Adaper™ Single Bond, 3M ESPE) and a 1-step self-etch adhesive system (Prompt L-Pop, 3M Dental Products, St Paul, MN, USA) after a 48 h storage of the MTA.…”

“…A number of previous studies have reported that optimal bond strength to resin composite was achieved using an etch and rinse system since 35% phosphoric acid effectively removes the smear layer which in turn creates a clean surface for better micromechanical retention with composite, in addition to its ability to produce deeper and more retentive microporosities in enamel and dentin 20,23,31,33,36) . The lesser performance of self-etch adhesives has been attributed to: 1) combining the acidic hydrophilic monomer and hydrophobic monomers into a single step may interfere with the adhesive polymerization; 2) the intrinsically low strength of the adhesive and 3) the inferior degree of monomer polymerization due to the solvent/oxygen inhibition effect during light polymerization of these adhesives 20) .…”