Microtensile bond strengths of single-step self-etch adhesive systems to bovine dentin

Uekusa, Satoshi; Tsubota, Keishi; Tonegawa, Motoka; Tsuchiya, Hiroaki; Iwasa, Mika; Kawamoto, Ryo; Takamizawa, Toshiki; Miyazaki, Masashi

doi:10.2334/josnusd.49.183

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the inferior results obtained with the selfetch system in the present study, before condemning all such adhesives as poorly performing, it is worth considering that different systems have distinct formulations, with different concentrations and types of acid monomers 30 . Therefore, the results obtained with the Adper SE Plus system cannot be fully extrapolated to other self-etch adhesives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Bond strength to dentin of total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems

Santos

Lima

Pontes

et al. 2014

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To assess the bond strength to dentin of the Single Bond (3M ESPE) and XP Bond (Dentsply) total-etch and Adper SE Plus (3M ESPE) self-etch adhesive systems. MethodsFifteen healthy human third molars were randomly allocated across three different groups of five teeth each according to the adhesive system. The occlusal portion of each tooth was removed under refrigeration using a flexible diamond disc (EXTEC, Enfield, CT, USA) down to an area of dentin that did not reveal enamel, as confirmed under a 40X stereo microscope (Ramsor, São Paulo, Brazil RESUMO ObjetivoAvaliar o grau de resistência de união à dentina dos sistemas adesivos de condicionamento ácido total Adper Single Bond (3M ESPE) e XP Bond (Dentsply) e autocondicionante Adper SE Plus (3M ESPE). MétodosQuinze terceiros molares humanos hígidos foram utilizados, divididos aleatoriamente em três grupos de cinco dentes cada, conforme o adesivo que seria utilizado. A porção oclusal foi removida com o auxílio de um disco flexível diamantado sob refrigeração, até expor uma área de dentina que não apresentasse ilhas de esmalte, comprovado em lupa esterioscópica em aumento de 40X. A smear layer foi padronizada em lixa d'água n°600. Na sequência os sistemas adesivos foram aplicados conforme as recomendações do fabricante, exceto o Adper SE Plus que teve seu tempo de polimerização triplicado. Sobre os dentes preparados foram construídos blocos de resina composta com 5mm de altura. As amostras foram armazenadas por 24 horas a 37°C em água destilada. Utilizando o disco flexível diamantado, foram obtidos corpos de prova com formato de palitos com área adesiva menor que 1mm². Em seguida o teste de microtração foi realizado numa Máquina de Ensaios Universal numa velocidade de 0,5 mm/min. Foram utilizados o teste ANOVA e comparações pareadas de Tukey. ResultadosOs valores da resistência de união para cada sistema adesivo em Mpa foram: 96,24 (XP Bond); 72,39 (Adper Single Bond) e 49,91 (Adper SE Plus). ConclusãoDessa forma, em relação à resistência de união à dentina, os adesivos convencionais apresentaram desempenho superior ao autocondicionante. Bond strength to dentin of total-etch and self-etch adhesive systemsResistência de união à dentina de sistemas adesivos convencionais e autocondicionante

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Bond strength to dentin of total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems

Santos

Lima

Pontes

et al. 2014

RGO, Rev. Gaúch. Odontol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This lower bonding efficiency has been thoroughly documented in laboratory and must be attributed to an interplay of several factors, such as low conversion rate [16,17], reduced mechanical strength of the adhesive resin, enhanced water sorption through osmosis from the host dentin, potential phase-separation effects when the adhesive solution is low in or free of HEMA [18][19][20], among others. Nevertheless, a one-step self-etch adhesive that shows relatively good bonding effectiveness to enamel and dentin in vitro is Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan) [21][22][23][24]. This one-step adhesive contains the functional monomer 10-MDP, which was shown to have the most efficient chemical bonding potential of all functional monomers tested so far [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 2 years

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2-year randomized, controlled prospective study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of a one-step self-etch adhesive and a "gold-standard" three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious Class-V lesions. The null hypothesis tested was that the one-step self-etch adhesive does perform clinically equally well as the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. A total of 161 lesions in 26 patients were restored with Clearfil AP-X (Kuraray). The restorations were bonded either with the "all-in-one" adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond (Kuraray) or with the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Optibond FL (Kerr). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months, 1 and 2 years, regarding their retention, marginal adapation, marginal discoloration, caries occurrence, preservation of tooth vitality and post-operative sensivity. Retention loss, severe marginal defects and/or discoloration that needed intervention (repair or replacement) and the occurrence of caries were considered as clinical failures. The recall rate at 2 years was 93.8%. Only one Clearfil S3 Bond restoration was lost at the 2-year recall. All other restorations were clinically acceptable. The number of restorations with defect-free margins decreased severely during the 2-year study period (to 6.7% and 25.3% for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL, respectively). The Clearfil S3 Bond restorations presented significantly more small marginal defects at the enamel side than the Optibond FL restorations (Clearfil S3 Bond: 93.3%; Optibond FL: 73.3%; p = 0.000). Superficial marginal discoloration increased in both groups (to 53.3% and 36% for Clearfil S3 Bond and Optibond FL, respectively) and was also more pronounced in the Clearfil S3 Bond group (p = 0.007). After 2 years, the simplified one-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil S3 Bond and the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Optibond FL were clinically equally successful, even though both adhesives were characterized by progressive degradation in marginal integrity. Clearfil S3 Bond exhibited more small enamel marginal defects and superficial marginal discolorations.

show abstract

“…Some authors indicate significant differences in values of bond strength parameters, while others observed no statistically significant differences [38]. Despite of these inconsistencies bovine dentin and enamel are still in use in adhesion experiments [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%