Current modifications of dental adhesive systems for composite resin restorations: a review in literature

Author(s):  
Dimitrios Dionysopoulos ◽  
Olga Gerasimidou ◽  
Constantinos Papadopoulos
2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soodabeh Kimyai ◽  
Siavash Savadi Oskoee ◽  
Amir Ahmad Ajami ◽  
Mahmoud Bahari ◽  
Mehdi Abed Kahnamoui ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Aim The aim was to evaluate the effects of Oral-B (OB), Listerine (LN) and Rembrandt Plus (RM) mouthrinses on microleakage of composite resin restorations bonded with two adhesive systems after bleaching with 10% carbamide peroxide. Materials and methods A total of 60 Cl V cavities were prepared on human premolars. The occlusal and gingival margins were placed 1 mm occlusal to and apical to CEJ respectively. The teeth were randomly divided into two groups based on the adhesive system used: Excite (EX) and Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) groups. After composite resin restoration of cavities, thermocycling and bleaching with 10% carbamide peroxide for 2 hours daily for 14 days, the teeth in each adhesive group were further subdivided into three subgroups and were immersed for 12 hours in the three OB, RM and LN mouthrinses. The teeth were then placed in 2% basic fuschin for 24 hours. After dissecting the teeth, microleakage was evaluated under a stereomicroscope at 16×. Data was analyzed with multifactor ANOVA and Bonferroni test at p < 0.05. Results Microleakage with EX was significantly higher than that with CSE (p = 0.009). Microleakage at gingival margins was significantly higher than that at occlusal margins (p = 0.15). Microleakage with OB was higher than that with LN (p = 0.02). However, there were no significant differences in microleakage between LN and RM (p = 1) and between RM and OB (p = 0.15). In addition, with the EX adhesive system, microleakage with OB was higher than that with LN and RM (p = 0.02). Conclusion In the present study, microleakage of composite resin restorations was influenced by the type of the adhesive system, mouthrinse type and the location of the cavity margin. Clinical significance Use of some mouthrinses, such as OB after bleaching can increase postrestoration microleakage of resin composite restorations bonded with etch-and-rinse adhesive systems. How to cite this article Ajami AA, Bahari M, Oskoee SS, Kimyai S, Kahnamoui MA, Rikhtegaran S, Ghaffarian R. Effect of Three Different Mouthrinses on Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations with Two Adhesive Systems after Bleaching with 10% Carbamide Peroxide. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(1):16-22.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Rocha Gomes Torres ◽  
Maria Filomena Rocha Lima Huhtala ◽  
Maria Amélia Máximo de Araújo ◽  
Simone Cristina Teixeira ◽  
Rodrigo Máximo de Araújo

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the sealing of composite resin restorations after cavity preparation with high speed diamonds burs or Er:YAG laser. Two different adhesive systems were used; conventional and self-etching. Seventy bovine incisors were divided into groups according to the cavity treatment (N = 10): G1 (bur + acid + Excite); G2 (bur + One Up); G3 (bur + laser + Excite); G3 (bur + laser + One Up); G4 (laser + acid + Excite); G5 (laser + One Up) and G6 (laser + Excite). Restorations were performed with Filtek Z250 3M/ESPE. The specimes were then thermocycled and placed in a vacuum machine, at a negative atmosphere of 20 inch Hg for 5 minutes, for removal of entrapped air. This procedure was followed by immersion in a 50% silver nitrate solution. The teeth were sectioned and the evaluation of the marginal leakage was performed in a light stereomicroscope. The results were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey statistical tests. It was concluded that preparations performed with high-speed turbines and Er:YAG laser presented the same performance; preparations with Er:YAG laser submitted to acid-etching and conventional adhesive system presented high values of marginal leakage, with statistical significance; conventional and self-etching adhesive systems presented the same performance as to marginal microleakage.


2012 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 6-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Mauro ◽  
V.C.A. Durão ◽  
A.L.F. Briso ◽  
M.L.M.M. Sundefeld ◽  
V. Rahal

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina Guenka Palma Dibb ◽  
Silmara Aparecida Milori Corona ◽  
Maria Cristina Borsatto ◽  
Karen Cristina Ferreira ◽  
Renata Pereira Ramos ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 1725-1733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliana Feltrin de Souza ◽  
Camila Bullio Fragelli ◽  
Fabiano Jeremias ◽  
Marco Aurélio Benini Paschoal ◽  
Lourdes Santos-Pinto ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 320-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilia Mattar de Amôedo Campos VELO ◽  
Livia Vieira Braga Ferraz COELHO ◽  
Roberta Tarkany BASTING ◽  
Flávia Lucisano Botelho do AMARAL ◽  
Fabiana Mantovani Gomes FRANÇA

ABSTRACT Composite resin restorations have increased considerably in popularity and predictability, enabling the realization of a minimally invasive dental treatment. However, to obtain the success of composite resin restorations, knowledge of adhesives and the use of the technique are required, otherwise failure may appear quickly. The objective of the present work was to conduct a literature review on the clinical performance of different types of composite resins and adhesive systems with regard to longevity. For this evaluation, some characteristics of the restorations were immediately verified after they were completed and after a determined time. Characteristics such as postoperative sensitivity, color, marginal integrity, secondary caries, texture, marginal adaptation, retention, displacement, marginal discoloration and anatomical shape had their performances compared. The influence of different adhesive systems on the longevity of the restorations was also observed as a function of its fundamental importance in the union between the tooth and the restorative material. It was concluded that most restorations performed clinically acceptable when hybrid, nanoparticle or microhybrid composite resins and conventional adhesive systems were used.


2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 248-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celso A Klein ◽  
Douglas da Silva ◽  
Eduardo G Reston ◽  
Diana LB Borghetti ◽  
Roberto Zimmer

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of this study is to assess marginal microleakage of cervical cavities restored with composite resins and two different adhesive techniques subjected to at-home and in-office bleaching. Materials and methods In this randomized, blind laboratory experiment, 60 bovine teeth recently extracted were collected and divided into six groups (n = 10 each group). The teeth received cervical cavity preparations (2 mm × 3 mm × 1 mm) with enamel margins. Two different adhesive systems were used (Single Bond 2 and Clearfil SE Bond), in addition to composite resin (Z250). Restored teeth received two different bleaching gels (Opalescence PF and Opalescence Boost). Teeth were thermocycled and analyzed under confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results No significant differences were observed (p > 0.05) in microleakage scores between the two groups not subjected to bleaching nor between the four groups that received bleaching treatment (p > 0.05), regardless of the gel and adhesive system employed. However, when comparing nonbleached with bleached teeth, those not subjected to bleaching showed statistically lower marginal microleakage scores (p < 0.05). Data were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Student–Newman–Keuls post hoc test, with significance set at 5%. Conclusion Marginal microleakage in composite resin restorations is influenced by the action of bleaching agents used both at-home and in-office, regardless of the adhesive system employed (total-etch or self-etch). Clinical significance Both at-home and in-office bleaching agents have an influence on the adhesive interface of resin restorations, producing changes and inducing marginal leakage. How to cite this article Klein Jr CA, da Silva D, Reston EG, Borghetti DLB, Zimmer R. Effect of At-home and In-office Bleaching on Marginal Microleakage in Composite Resin Restorations using Two Adhesive Systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018;19(3):248-252.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document