Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations

Abstract BACKGROUND: Dental adhesives are believed to influence marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration when used under posterior resin-based composite restorations. Studies on the latest adhesive systems reveal that the group of the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (3-E&RA) and the one-step self-etch adhesive (1-SEA) have entirely different bonding mechanisms, as well as different bond strength and resistance to chemical, thermal and mechanical factors. STUDY OBJECTIVES: A hypothesis that a 1-SEA would result in greater enamel marginal discoloration and poorer marginal adaptation than a 3-E&RA was tested. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred restorations were placed with a 1-SEA and 100 restorations with a 3-E&RA. Teeth were restored with Filtek Supreme nanofilled resin-composite and were evaluated for marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration at baseline, and 6 months, 12 months, and 36 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The statistical analysis revealed significant differences in marginal integrity between test groups. The 1-SEA resulted in greater enamel marginal discoloration and poorer marginal adaptation than the 3-E&RA at any recall time. CONCLUSIONS: Marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration depend on the type of dentin adhesive used. The restorations with Filtek Supreme and Scotchbond MP are better than the restorations with Adper Prompt L-Pop with regard to the marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration at 6-, 12- and 36-month evaluations.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Dentin Adhesives and Liner Materials on the Microleakage of Class II Resin Composite Restorations in Primary and Permanent Teeth

Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry ◽

10.17796/jcpd.38.3.h551um6313618465 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 38 (3) ◽

pp. 223-228 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

H C Güngör ◽

E Canoğlu ◽

Z C Çehreli

Keyword(s):

Primary Teeth ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Class Ii ◽

Permanent Teeth ◽

Single Bond ◽

Liner Material ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Dentin Adhesives ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Self Etch

>Purpose: To compare the occlusal and gingival microleakage of Class-II composite restorations utilizing etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and different liner materials in primary and permanent teeth. Study design: Standardized class-II cavities were prepared in freshly-extracted sound primary and permanent molars (n=80/each), with all cavosurface margins involving enamel. The main experimental groups were; A. Single Bond 2/primary teeth; B. Adper SE Plus/primary teeth; C. Single Bond 2/permanent teeth; and D. Adper SE Plus/permanent teeth. Each group comprised 4 subgroups (n=10/each) with respect to the liner material employed (n=10/subgroup): 1. Fuji VII; 2. Fuji Triage; 3. Filtek Supreme XT Flowable Composite, and 4. No liner. All teeth were restored with Filtek Supreme XT Universal Nanofilled Composite. Following thermocycling and immersion in basic fuchsin, the extent of microleakage was measured on crown sections using image analysis. The data were analyzed with Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test, Mann-Whitney U-Test and Kruskal-Wallis One-Way ANOVA at ?=0.05. Results: In both primary and permanent teeth the use of etch-and-rinse adhesive resulted in similar occlusal and gingival microleakage values (p>0.05). As for the self-etch adhesive, similar results were observed (p>0.05) with the exception of significantly less occlusal leakage in the Fuji Triage VII and Fuji Triage subgroups of primary teeth than those of permanent teeth (pÃ0.05). When the effects of liner material and the type of adhesive were disregarded, significantly more gingival microleakage was observed in primary teeth than in permanent teeth (pÃ0.01), while the occlusal microleakage values were similar (p>0.05). Irrespective of the tooth type and adhesive material, comparison of subgroups containing a liner material with those without one revealed no significant differences for both occlusal and gingival microleakage values (p>0.05). Conclusions: Occlusal microleakage was similar in both primary and permanent teeth, while a lesser extent of gingival seal was observed in primary teeth. Overall, placement of a liner material did not improve resistance to microleakage.

Download Full-text

Eight-year randomized clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch or a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive

Clinical Oral Investigations ◽

10.1007/s00784-014-1345-8 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 19 (6) ◽

pp. 1371-1379 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Jan W. V. van Dijken ◽

Ulla Pallesen

Keyword(s):

Clinical Evaluation ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Class Ii ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

One Step ◽

Self Etch

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Post-Operative Sensitivity of Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Nano Resin Composite: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences ◽

10.3889/oamjms.2019.656 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (14) ◽

pp. 2335-2342 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sarah Mahmoud Hussien Afifi ◽

Mohamed Fouad Haridy ◽

Mohamed Riad Farid

Keyword(s):

Resin Composite ◽

Visual Analog Scale Score ◽

Pain Tolerance ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Disagreement ◽

Restoration Failure ◽

Self Etch ◽

Postoperative Sensitivity

BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in restorative dentistry adhesive restorations may cause postoperative sensitivity which leads to restoration failure. AIM: This study aimed to compare and evaluate the incremental and bulk fill resin Composite postoperative sensitivity in class II posterior restorations bonded with two adhesive systems (self-etch and etch-and-rinse). METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly selected, their age range from twenty-five to forty years old, divided into two groups according to the packing technique of resin composite material; incremental Tetric Evoceram and Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite. Thirty patients (n = 30) for incremental Tetric Evoceram resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth).Thirty patients (n = 30) for Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used (etch and rinse or self-etch), they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth). Post-operative pain assessed at 24 hours, 1 week and 1 month using the Visual Analog Scale Score (VAS). Each patient was instructed to put a mark on the VAS line at home to point out the intensity of pain at each assessment period. The problem of measuring the pain that pain tolerance of individuals may be different from the others. This may be due to different reasons, and it is not always because of a problem in the restoration RESULTS: After 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month, no statistically significant disagreement between the two resin composite types using self-etch adhesive strategy and total-etch adhesive strategy. Also, when the two adhesive systems were compared using Bulk Fill resin composite and incremental Nano resin composite no statistically significant disagreement between the two adhesive systems after 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month. CONCLUSION: The post-operative hypersensitivity is related to many factors as the procedure of cavity preparation, adhesive approach, and type of resin composite used and placement technique of the resin composite.

Download Full-text

Clinical Impact of Dental Adhesives on Postoperative Sensitivity in Class I and Class II Resin-Composite Restorations

Folia Medica ◽

10.1515/folmed-2015-0045 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 57 (3-4) ◽

pp. 243-249

Author(s):

Neshka A. Manchorova-Veleva ◽

Stoyan B. Vladimirov ◽

Donka А. Keskinova

Keyword(s):

Resin Composite ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Cold Sensitivity ◽

Cold Stimulation ◽

Study Objective ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Vitality Test ◽

Self Etch ◽

Postoperative Sensitivity

Abstract BACKGROUND: Self-etch adhesives are believed to prevent postoperative sensitivity when used under posterior resin-based composite restorations. STUDY OBJECTIVE: A hypothesis that a one-step self-etch adhesive (1-SEA) would result in less postoperative sensitivity than a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (3-E&RA) was tested. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred restorations were placed with a 1-SEA and 100 restorations with a 3-E&RA. Teeth were restored with Filtek Supreme nanofilled resin-composite and were evaluated for sensitivity to cold and masticatory forces at baseline, 7 days, 14 days, 30 days, and 6 months postoperatively. Vitality test scores of the teeth were recorded at the same periods. RESULTS: The evaluation of cold sensitivity intensity (VAS score) for all observation periods in both restoration groups did not reveal any statistical significance. The differences in the response time to cold stimulation (0 - 15 sec) for the restorations made with a 1-SEA and those made with a separate etch step are statistically insignificant. There are no significant differences in the vitality of the restored teeth at intra- or inter-group comparison. The statistical analysis revealed significant differences in postoperative sensitivity to masticatory forces at postoperative day 14 and day 30 in the 3-E&RA group. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative sensitivity depends on the type of dentin adhesive used. More intensive complaints of postoperative sensitivity were recorded under masticatory forces at postoperative day 14 and day 30 in 3-E&RA in comparison with 1-SEA.

Download Full-text

Marginal Integrity of Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Class II Composite Restorations

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/14-306-l ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 41 (2) ◽

pp. 146-156 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

F Al-Harbi ◽

D Kaisarly ◽

D Bader ◽

M El Gezawi

Keyword(s):

Resin Composite ◽

Class Ii ◽

Chi Square ◽

Sandwich Technique ◽

Thermomechanical Cycling ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Marginal Integrity ◽

Chi Square Test ◽

Maxillary Premolars ◽

Self Etch

SUMMARY Bulk-fill composites have been introduced to facilitate the placement of deep direct resin composite restorations. This study aimed at analyzing the cervical marginal integrity of bulk-fill vs incremental and open-sandwich class II resin composite restorations after thermomechanical cycling using replica scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and ranking according to the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Box-only class II cavities were prepared in 91 maxillary premolars with the gingival margin placed 1 mm above and below the cemento-enamel junction. Eighty-four premolars were divided into self-etch and total-etch groups, then subdivided into six restorative subgroups (n=7): 1-Tetric Ceram HB (TC) was used incrementally and in the open-sandwich technique with 2-Tetric EvoFlow (EF) and 3-Smart Dentin Replacement (SD). Bulk-fill restoratives were 4-SonicFill (SF), 5-Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (TN), and 6-Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TE). In subgroups 1-5, Tetric N-Bond self-etch and Tetric N-Bond total-etch adhesives were used, whereas in subgroup 6, AdheSE self-etch and ExciTE F total etch were used. One more group (n=7) was restored with Filtek P90 Low Shrink Posterior Restorative (P9) only in combination with its self-etch P90 System Adhesive. Materials were manipulated and light cured (20 seconds, 1600 mW/cm2), and restorations were artificially aged by thermo-occlusal load cycling. Polyvinyl-siloxane impressions were taken and poured with epoxy resin. Resin replicas were examined by SEM (200×) for marginal sealing, and percentages of perfect margins were analyzed. Moreover, samples were examined using loupes (3.5×) and explorers and categorized according to the FDI criteria. Results were statistically analyzed (SEM by Kruskal-Wallis test and FDI by chi-square test) without significant differences in either the replica SEM groups (p=0.848) or the FDI criteria groups (p>0.05). The best SEM results at the enamel margin were in TC+EF/total-etch and SF/total-etch and at the cementum margins were in SF/total-etch and TE/self-etch, while the worst were in TC/self-etch at both margins. According to FDI criteria, the best was TE/total-etch at the enamel margin, and the poorest was P9/self-etch at the cementum margin. Groups did not differ significantly, and there was a strong correlation in results between replica SEM and FDI ranking.

Download Full-text

Demineralized enamel reduces margin integrity of self-etch, but not of etch-and-rinse bonded composite restorations

Odontology ◽

10.1007/s10266-018-0398-6 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 107 (3) ◽

pp. 308-315 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Philipp Körner ◽

Aljmedina Sulejmani ◽

Daniel B. Wiedemeier ◽

Thomas Attin ◽

Tobias T. Tauböck

Keyword(s):

Composite Restorations ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Demineralized Enamel ◽

Bonded Composite ◽

Self Etch

Download Full-text

Effect of Diode Laser (810 nm) Irradiation on Marginal Microleakage of Multi-mode Adhesive Resins in Class V Composite Restorations

Journal of lasers in medical sciences ◽

10.15171/jlms.2019.45 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 275-282

Author(s):

Niusha Golbar ◽

Shahin Kasraei ◽

Anahit Afrasiabi ◽

Elahe Mostajir ◽

Seyed Masoud Mojahedi

Keyword(s):

Diode Laser ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Control Group ◽

Blue Dye ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Universal Adhesive ◽

Class V ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Self Etch ◽

Multi Mode

Introduction: Some studies have shown that laser irradiation on unpolymerized adhesives can improve composite-dentin adhesion. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of the diode laser (810 nm) on the microleakage of multi-mode adhesive systems at enamel and dentin margins of composite restorations. Methods: Classic class V boxes were prepared on 48 sound premolar teeth and randomly divided into 6 groups (n=16). In the control groups, Scotchbond Universal (SBC), G-Premio (GBC), and Ambar U (AMC) were used by a self-etch mode. In the test groups (SBL, GBL, ABL), the 810 nm diode laser was irradiated (1 W) for 10 seconds before the polymerization of the adhesive. The boxes were restored by the resin composite. After finishing and polishing, the samples were thermocycled (5°C to 55°C) for 1000 cycles and then immersed in 0.1% methylene blue dye (48 hours). Dye penetration through the gingival and occlusal margins was measured by Stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed at the 5% significance level using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Significant differences were found between the control and test groups (P<0.05). The occlusal margins of the SBL and GBL groups and the cervical margin of the SBL group exhibited the lowest microleakage (P<0.05). The AM control group showed maximum microleakage at cervical and occlusal margins. Conclusion: The irradiation of the 810 nm diode laser on the unpolymerized universal adhesive systems in a self-etch mode caused a significant reduction in enamel and dentin marginal microleakage of composite restorations.

Download Full-text