Bonding performance of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel, dentin and a nano-hybrid composite

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze bond strengths of self-adhesive flowable composites on enamel, dentin and nano-hybrid composite. Enamel, dentin and nano-hybrid composite (Venus Diamond, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany) specimens were prepared. Three self-adhesive composites (Constic, DMG, Germany; Fusio Liquid Dentin, Pentron Clinical, USA; Vertise Flow, Kerr Dental, Italy) or a conventional flowable composite (Venus Diamond Flow, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany, etch&rinse technique) were applied to enamel and dentin. Nano-hybrid composite specimens were initially aged by thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55 °C). Surfaces were left untreated or pretreated by mechanical roughening, AlO air abrasion or silica coating/silanization. In half of the composite specimens, an adhesive (Optibond FL, Kerr Dental, Italy) was used prior to the application of the flowable composites. Following thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55 °C) of all specimens, shear bond strengths (SBS) and failure modes were analyzed (each subgroup n = 16). Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVAs/Bonferroni post hoc tests, Weibull statistics and χ -tests (p< 0.05). SBS (MPa) of the self-adhesive composites on enamel and dentin were significantly lower (enamel: < 5, dentin: < 3) than those of the conventional flowable composite (enamel: 13.0 ± 5.1, dentin: 11.2 ± 6.3), and merely adhesive failures could be observed. On the nano-hybrid composite, SBS were significantly related to the pretreatment. Adhesive application improved SBS of the conventional, but not of the self-adhesive composites. The self-adhesive composite groups showed less cohesive failures than the reference group; the occurence of cohesive failures increased after surface pretreatment. Bonding of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel and dentin is lower than bonding to a nano-hybrid composite.

Development and status of resin composite as dental restorative materials

“…Self‐adhesive composites combine the benefits of adhesive and composite technology, bringing novel horizons to restorative techniques, as they are claimed to bond to tooth tissue without a separate adhesive . These materials contain self‐etching and/ or self‐adhesive monomers that are able to etch enamel and dentin surfaces or chemically bond to hydroxyapatite, such as the 4‐methacryloxyethyl trimellitic acid, glycerol phosphate dimethacrylate monomers, 10‐MDP monomer, and so on . Though several in vitro studies on physical properties, bond strength, and marginal sealing potential have been published, clinical research studies ongoing on these products are still limited .…”

“…33,37 These laboratory studies revealed that there are still many controversies about bonding effectiveness and mechanical properties so far, and some studies reported that self-adhesive composites show limited interaction with dentin or enamel. 33,38 Consequently, critical investigation and clinical assessments are needed for self-adhesive composites.…”

Effect of Dentin Surface Treatment Using a Non-Thermal Argon Plasma Brush on the Bond Strength of a Self-Adhesive Resin Composite

“…Each dental adhesive comprises a specific functional monomer that determines its adhesive performance to dental tissue [24]. Vertise TM Flow contains GPDM monomers which are well-known from the OptiBond FL adhesive system [25]. GPDM features a rather short spacer chain and high hydrophilicity that result in a strong etching effect and a better dentin wettability but also a relatively low chemical bonding potential to hydroxyapatite compared to other self-adhesive monomers [26].…”

Evaluation of Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Composites for Amalgam Repair with or Without Alloy Primer, in Terms of Shear Bond Strength

“…New self-adhesive flowable resin composites, such as Constic (C) (DMG, Germany) and Fusio Liquid Dentin (FLD) (Pentron Clinical, USA) were recently introduced to the dental market (10). The use of these materials eliminates the need for a separate bonding procedure, improves the ease of use and saves time (11,12).…”

“…A previous study (14) reported a self-adhesive composite to be adequate for the repair of noncarious amalgam defects, in terms of microleakage. Moreover, studies have focused on the bonding strength of self-adhesive flowable resin composites to dentin, enamel, nano-composites or ceramics (10,(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20); however, information on the ability of these composites to bond with amalgam remains lacking.…”