Micro-tensile bond strength of different adhesive systems on sound dentin and resin-based composite: An in-vitro study

Mallick, Rashmirekha; Sarangi, Priyanka; Mohanty, Sandhyarani; Behera, Subasish; Nanda, Soumyaranjan; Satapathy, Sukanta Kumar

doi:10.4103/0972-0707.164036

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because the µTBS method requires further specimen processing after the bonding procedure, this makes the test more difficult, technique sensitive, and results in dehydration of the smaller specimens [ 26 ]. In addition, the drawbacks of µTBS method include difficulty in measuring bond strengths lower than 5 MPa, difficulty in fabricating specimens with consistent geometry, and easy damage of specimens.…”

Section: Types Of Bond Strength Testing Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Materials to Tooth Structure using Bond Strength Test Methods: A Review of Literature

Mourad

2018

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The rapid developments in the field of adhesive dental materials have led to improvements in many aspects of clinical dentistry. Adhesive bond strength plays an important role in determining the clinical performance and longevity of dental restorations. Nevertheless, bond strength tests have never been well-standardized, although a number of important recommendations have been made.Objective:The aim of this paper is to critically review the validity of different bond strength testing methods for assessment of bonding effectiveness of adhesive materials to tooth structure and discuss factors that may affect bond strength measurement.Data Collection:Relevant literature published between 1983 and 2018 was collected and reviewed from the PubMed database and Google scholar resources.Review Results:Results of the current bond testing methods should be used to compare materials tested under the same laboratory settings, but they shouldn’t be used to make direct inferences on their clinical behaviour. Shear and micro-shear tests, result in non-uniform stress distribution, stress concentration at the substrate area, and predominantly tensile stresses rather than shear stresses. Micro-tensile bond tests provide many advantages over the shear tests, although these methods are technique sensitive and labour intensive.Conclusion:Bond strength testing methods should be well-standardized, but there are many factors that cannot be fully controlled which leads to variation and misinterpretation of the data about the bonding abilities of adhesives.Clinical Significance:New adhesive materials should be subjected to a combination of testing protocols to properly assess their bonding effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Types Of Bond Strength Testing Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Materials to Tooth Structure using Bond Strength Test Methods: A Review of Literature

Mourad

2018

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The μTBS test was used in this study to mechanically assess the strength of the resin–dentin interface complex. Today, the μTBS is one of the most commonly used methodologies[ 10 11 ] since it has several advantages:[ 10 ] multiple specimens can be obtained from a single tooth, the stress is more uniformly distributed during loading across the interface. [ 3 ] Many modifications to this μTBS method have been proposed in the literature,[ 12 ] especially for the final preparation of the interface area.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives to dentin after 24 h water storage

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:This study evaluated the immediate bonding effectiveness of five self-etch adhesive systems bonded to dentin.Materials and Methods:The microtensile bond strength of five self-etch adhesives systems, including one two-step and four one-step self-etch adhesives to dentin, was measured. Human third molars had their superficial dentin surface exposed, after which a standardized smear layer was produced using a medium-grit diamond bur. The selected adhesives were applied according to their respective manufacturer's instructions for μTBS measurement after storage in water at 37°C for 24 h.Results:The μTBS varied from 11.1 to 44.3 MPa; the highest bond strength was obtained with the two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond and the lowest with the one-step self-etch adhesive Adper Prompt L-Pop. Pretesting failures mainly occurring during sectioning with the slow-speed diamond saw were observed only with the one-step self-etch adhesive Adper Prompt L-Pop (4 out of 18).Conclusions:When bonded to dentin, the self-etch adhesives with simplified application procedures (one-step self-etch adhesives) still underperform as compared to the two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond.

show abstract

Effect of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors on microtensile bond strength of dental composite restorations to dentin in use of an etch‐and‐rinse adhesive system

Saffarpour

Valizadeh

Amini

et al. 2020

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim This study assesses the effect of matrix metalloproteinases on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of an etch‐and‐rinse adhesive system. Methods This in vitro study evaluated 88 extracted premolars. The teeth were sectioned to expose dentin and were then randomly divided into four groups (n = 22). In group 1 (control), dentin surface was etched, and Adper Single Bond 2 was applied. In groups 2–4, dentin surface was etched and chlorhexidine (CHX), 1‐ethyl‐3‐(3‐dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide (EDC), and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) were applied on the surfaces, respectively, and blotted dry. Next, Adper Single Bond 2 was applied and all teeth were built up with Z350 composite. In each group, half the samples immediately and the other half after 10,000 thermal cycles underwent μTBS test. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = .05). Results In thermocycled samples, maximum μTBS was noted in CHX group followed by DMSO, EDC, and control group (p < .001). The thermocycled μTBS of composite to dentin was significantly higher in CHX group compared with EDC, DMSO, and control groups (p < .001) but was not significantly different in EDC and DMSO groups (p = .498). Conclusion The thermocycled μTBS obtained by the application of CHX, EDC, and DMSO was significantly higher compared with the value to the control group.

show abstract

Micro-tensile bond strength of different adhesive systems on sound dentin and resin-based composite: An in-vitro study

Cited by 10 publications

References 18 publications

Assessment of Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Materials to Tooth Structure using Bond Strength Test Methods: A Review of Literature

Assessment of Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Materials to Tooth Structure using Bond Strength Test Methods: A Review of Literature

Bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives to dentin after 24 h water storage

Effect of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors on microtensile bond strength of dental composite restorations to dentin in use of an etch‐and‐rinse adhesive system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About