scholarly journals Effects of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid and sodium hypochlorite on the bond strength of bonding agents to pulp chamber lateral walls

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Çağatay Barutcigil ◽  
Osman Tolga Harorlı ◽  
Erdal Özcan ◽  
Hakan Arslan ◽  
Mehmet Yıldız
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Sodium Hypochlorite ◽  
Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid ◽  
Pulp Chamber ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Lateral Walls

scholarly journals The Effect of Different Disinfecting Agents on Bond Strength of Resin Composites

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Mohammed Hassan ◽  
Ahmed Ali Goda ◽  
Kusai Baroudi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Sodium Hypochlorite ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Surface Pretreatment ◽  
Dentin Surface ◽  
Post Hoc

Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different disinfectant agents on bond strength of two types of resin composite materials.Methods. A total of 80 sound posterior teeth were used. They were divided into four groups(n=20)according to the dentin surface pretreatment (no treatment, chlorhexidine gluconate 2%, sodium hypochlorite 4%, and EDTA 19%). Each group was divided into two subgroups according to the type of adhesive (prime and bond 2.1 and Adper easy one). Each subgroup was further divided into two subgroups according to the type of resin composite (TPH spectrum and Tetric EvoCeram). Shear bond strength between dentin and resin composite was measured using Universal Testing Machine. Data collected were statistically analyzed byt-test and one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’spost hoctest.Results. It was found that dentin treated with EDTA recorded the highest shear bond strength values followed by sodium hypochlorite and then chlorhexidine groups while the control group showed the lowest shear bond strength.Conclusions. The surface treatment of dentin before bonding application has a great effect on shear bond strength between resin composite and dentin surface.

scholarly journals COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE SHEAR BOND STRENGTH OF THREE SELF-ETCH DENTIN BONDING AGENTS TO DENTIN: AN IN-VITRO STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 454-459
Author(s):  
Bhalla V. ◽  
◽  
K. Goud M. ◽  
Chockattu S. ◽  
Khera A ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Mandibular Molar ◽  
Self Etch

Background:Dentin bonding is an ever-evolving field in adhesive dentistry. With the introduction of newer systems into the market, there is a crucial need to test their efficiency in terms of bond strength. Dual-cured adhesives in theory may provide for a better degree of conversion as compared to conventional light-cured adhesives .Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of three different self-etch adhesives namely ClearfilSE bond (Kuraray), Tetric N Bond Universal (IvoclarVivadent) and Futura Bond DC (Voco) to dentin. Materials & Methods: Ninety extracted non-carious, intact human mandibular molar teeth were selected for this study. Each tooth was decoronated using a double-sided diamond disc with water coolant to a depth of 2mm from the cusp tip .The cut dentin surface was then abraded against 600-grit wet silicon carbide papers for 60 seconds to produce a uniform smear layer. The root portion of each tooth was mounted on a plastic ring using cold cure acrylic resin. Specimens were then divided into three adhesive groups of 30 teeth each, Group A: ClearfilSE Bond (Kuraray), Group B: Tetric N Bond Universal (IvoclarVivadent), Group C :Futura Bond DC (Voco). All bonding agents were used according to the manufacturers’ instructions, in combination with the resin composite Tetric N Ceram (IvoclarVivadent). The samples were thermocycled, followed by shear bond strength testing using a Universal testing machine (Hounsfield). Data were subjected to statistical analysis using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (P<0.05) and Post hoc Tukey’s test for inter- and intra- group analysis respectively. Results: Clearfil SE Bond yielded the highest shear bond strength values (30.9 ±4.66 MPa) which were statistically significant, followed byTetric N Bond Universal group (29.8 ±4.34) and the lowest shear bond strength values were recorded for Futura Bond DC (18.2 ±3.13). Conclusion: Clearfil SE bond and Tetric N bond Universal can be considered as better options than Futura Bond DC.

scholarly journals Effects of different etching methods and bonding procedures on shear bond strength of orthodontic metal brackets applied to different CAD/CAM ceramic materials

2017 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kutalmış Buyuk ◽  
Ahmet Serkan Kucukekenci
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Ceramic Materials ◽  
Ceramic Surface ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Ceramic Surfaces ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Hybrid Ceramic

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic metal brackets applied to different types of ceramic surfaces treated with different etching procedures and bonding agents. Materials and Methods: Monolithic CAD/CAM ceramic specimens (N = 120; n = 40 each group) of feldspathic ceramic Vita Mark II, resin nanoceramic Lava Ultimate, and hybrid ceramic Vita Enamic were fabricated (14 × 12 × 3 mm). Ceramic specimens were separated into four subgroups (n = 10) according to type of surface treatment and bonding onto the ceramic surface. Within each group, four subgroups were prepared by phosphoric acid, hydrofluoric acid, Transbond XT primer, and Clearfill Ceramic primer. Mandibular central incisor metal brackets were bonded with light-cure composite. The SBS data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD tests. Results: The highest SBS was found in the Vita Enamic group, which is a hybrid ceramic, etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Transbond XT Adhesive primer (7.28 ± 2.49 MPa). The lowest SBS was found in the Lava Ultimate group, which is a resin nano-ceramic etched with hydrofluoric acid and applied Clearfill ceramic primer (2.20 ± 1.21 MPa). Conclusions: CAD/CAM material types and bonding procedures affected bond strength (P &lt; .05), but the etching procedure did not (P &gt; .05). The use of Transbond XT as a primer bonding agent resulted in higher SBS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document