Influence of selective etching on the enamel and dentin leakage of three low shrinkage composites in class V restoration

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1941-1949
Author(s):  
Hend N. Al-Nahedh
Keyword(s):  
Silver Nitrate ◽  
Selective Etching ◽  
Thermal Cycles ◽  
Class V ◽  
Bond Force ◽  
Selective Etch ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Ammoniacal Silver

This study determined if prior selective enamel etching affected leakage of enamel/dentin margins in Class V low-shrinkage resin-based composite restorations. Round cavities, centered on the cemento/enamel junction, 2 mm in diameter and 2 mm in depth were prepared on the buccal, palatal or lingual surfaces of premolar teeth to have a total of 60 cavities. One side of the tooth received selective enamel etching and both sides were restored using one of 3 restorative materials (n = 10): Aelite LS posterior/All-bond SE, Estelite Sigma Quick/Bond Force, or Filtek P90/P90 System Adhesive. The teeth were fatigued for 5000 thermal cycles, and the marginal sealing was challenged with 50% ammoniacal silver nitrate. The interface was analyzed and the leakage score was calculated. Two-way ANOVA revealed that Filtek P90 (25.5±17.4) had lower leakage than Estelite Sigma Quick (63.1±34.5) and Aelite LS Posterior (64.2±41.8) with self-etching. With selective etching, the three materials showed reduced leakage in enamel. A significant difference (P <0.05) was found between leakage in enamel and dentin for the Aelite LS Posterior selective etch group and for Estelite Sigma Quick. Selective etching reduced enamel leakage for all materials in one-step self-etch materials. Two-step self-etch adhesives bond better to enamel and dentin than one-step resin-based adhesives.

scholarly journals Microleakage after Thermocycling of Three Self-Etch Adhesives under Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Restorations

2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine O. Geerts ◽  
Laurence Seidel ◽  
Adelin I. Albert ◽  
Audrey M. Gueders
Keyword(s):  
Polyacrylic Acid ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Class V ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Ionomer Cement

This study was designed to evaluate microleakage that appeared on Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) restorations. Sixty class V cavities () were cut on thirty extracted third molars, which were randomly allocated to three experimental groups. All the buccal cavities were pretreated with polyacrylic acid, whereas the lingual cavities were treated with three one-step Self-Etch adhesives, respectively, Xeno III (Dentsply Detrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), iBond exp (Heraeus Kulzer gmbH & Co. KG, Hanau, Germany), and Adper Prompt-L-Pop (3M ESPE AG, Dental products Seefeld, Germany). All cavities were completely filled with RMGIC, teeth were thermocycled for 800 cycles, and leakage was evaluated. Results were expressed as means standard deviations (SDs). Microleakage scores were analysed by means of generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) assuming an ordinal logistic link function. All results were considered to be significant at the 5% critical level (). The results showed that bonding RMGIC to dentin with a Self-Etch adhesive rather than using polyacrylic acid did not influence microleakage scores (), except for one tested Self-Etch adhesive, namely, Xeno III (). Nevertheless, our results did not show any significant difference between the three tested Self-Etch adhesive systems. In conclusion, the pretreatment of dentin with Self-Etch adhesive system, before RMGIC filling, seems to be an alternative to the conventional Dentin Conditioner for the clinicians as suggested by our results (thermocycling) and others (microtensile tests).

scholarly journals Effect of Multiple Consecutive Adhesive Coatings on Microleakage of Class V Cavities

2009 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 178-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hacer Deniz Arisu ◽  
Evrim Eliguzeloglu ◽  
Mine Betul Uctasli ◽  
Huma Omurlu ◽  
Emin Turkoz
Keyword(s):  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Class V ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Self Etch

ABSTRACTObjectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of multiple consecutive adhesive coatings of a one-step self-etch adhesive on microleakage of Class V cavities.Methods: Standardized box shaped Class V cavities were prepared onto the buccal side of forty five non-carious human premolar teeth. The teeth were randomly divided into three groups of fifteen teeth in each and restored as: Group I- one-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil S3, Kuraray Co. Ltd., Osaka, Japan) was applied according to the manufacturer�s instructions, Group II- two consecutive same one-step self-etch adhesive application was performed, and Group III- three consecutive same one-step self-etch adhesive application was performed. After the adhesive applications light curing unit was activated for 20 seconds and the cavities were restored with a composite resin. The restorations were finished with aluminum oxide discs and the specimens were stored in water at room temperature for 24 hours before they were immersed in 2% methylene blue for 48 hours. The dye penetration was examined under a stereomicroscope and the asymtotic significance were analysed with Kruskall Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests and dentin-enamel margins were compared with each other with Wilcoxon Signed Rank test.Results: The microleakage at the dentinal margins of Class V cavities were significantly decreased with two (Group II) and three (Group III) consecutive adhesive applications (P<.05). There was no significant difference between Group I, Group II and Group III at the enamel margins (P<.05). The microleakage at the dentinal margins were significantly higher than the enamel margins in Group I and Group II but in Group III there was no statistically significant difference (P<.05).Conclusions: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, it may be concluded that three consecutive applications of the one-step self-etch adhesive resin provided better sealing than the one coat of adhesive resin at the dentinal margins of Class V cavities. (Eur J Dent 2009;3:178-184)

Two Adhesive Systems-effect on Adhesion to Tooth Structure

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (7) ◽  
pp. 2608-2613
Author(s):  
Larisa Simona Deac ◽  
Kamel Earar ◽  
Adela Loredana Colceriu Burtea ◽  
Alexandra Stefania Berghe ◽  
Aurora Antoniac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Hybrid Layer ◽  
Tooth Structure ◽  
Selective Etch ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Wisdom Teeth ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Group 1

This study evaluates and compares by dye penetration method and SEM photomicrographs the sealing obtained using two different classes of adhesive systems (etch-and-rinse and self-etch with selective etching) with SDR (Dentsply) bulk fill composite. 84 class V cavities were prepared on oral and vestibular face of 42 intact, freshly extracted wisdom teeth. The cavities were randomly divided in two groups and restored: Group 1 with prime &bond one select (Dentsply) and SDR (Dentsply) and Group 2 with prime&bond one Etch&Rinse (Dentsply) and SDR (Dentsply). Prime&bond one Select (Dentsply) is a single component adhesive and can be used in self etch mode, in selective enamel etch mode, or in etch-and-rinse mode. We chosen for this study the selective etch of the enamel mode. Prime&bond one Etch Rinse (Dentsply) is a universal etch-and-rinse one-bottle dental adhesive, designed to be used in two steps. The bulk fill composites are commonly used in modern dentistry due to their properties of low polymerization shrinkage and curing in layer of 4 mm depth, offering the practitioner a fast clinical procedure with good results. The results showed a good sealing at enamel and dentin margins with no statistically significant difference between adhesives, even though the mean of enamel infiltration was smaller for Group1. Furthermore the results show that there were differences between the two groups, for the infiltrations at the enamel, the values of microleakage being arithmetically higher for Group 1, but with no statistically difference between the two groups.SEM images showed for both groups a good adhesion surface with the tooth, but the hybrid layer of the total-etch adhesives is different from the hybrid layer formed by self etch adhesives, in terms of thickness, uniformity. In conclusion both adhesive systems have equivalent sealing qualities and can be successfully used with SDR.

scholarly journals One-Year Clinical Evaluation of the Bonding Effectiveness of a One-Step, Self-Etch Adhesive in Noncarious Cervical Lesion Therapy

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Babacar Faye ◽  
Mouhamed Sarr ◽  
Khaly Bane ◽  
Adjaratou Wakha Aidara ◽  
Seydina Ousmane Niang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Usphs Criteria ◽  
One Step ◽  
One Year ◽  
The One ◽  
Self Etch

This study evaluated the one-year clinical performance of a one-step, self-etch adhesive (Optibond All-in-One, Kerr, CA, USA) combined with a composite (Herculite XRV Ultra, Kerr Hawe, CA, USA) to restore NCCLs with or without prior acid etching. Restorations performed by the same practitioner were evaluated at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months using modified USPHS criteria. At 6 months, the recall rate was 100%. The retention rate was 84.2% for restorations with prior acid etching, but statistically significant differences were observed between baseline and 6 months. Without acid etching, the retention rate was 77%, and no statistically significant difference was noted between 3 and 6 months. Marginal integrity (93.7% with and 87.7% without acid etching) and discoloration (95.3% with and 92.9% without acid etching) were scored as Alpha or Bravo, with better results after acid etching. After one year, the recall rate was 58.06%. Loss of pulp vitality, postoperative sensitivity, or secondary caries were not observed. After one year retention rate was of 90.6% and 76.9% with and without acid conditioning. Optibond All-in-One performs at a satisfactory clinical performance level for restoration of NCCLs after 12 months especially after acid etching.

scholarly journals Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfonso Sánchez-Ayala ◽  
Arcelino Farias-Neto ◽  
Larissa Soares Reis Vilanova ◽  
João Carlos Gomes ◽  
Osnara Maria Mongruel Gomes
Keyword(s):  
Class V ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

scholarly journals Two Modes of Nanoleakage Expression in Single-step Adhesives

2002 ◽  
Vol 81 (7) ◽  
pp. 472-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.R. Tay ◽  
D.H. Pashley ◽  
M. Yoshiyama
Keyword(s):  
Silver Nitrate ◽  
Silver Ions ◽  
Single Step ◽  
Mineral Dissolution ◽  
Resin Infiltration ◽  
Transmission Electron ◽  
Hybrid Layers ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Ammoniacal Silver ◽  
Spotted Pattern

Self-etch adhesives that etch, prime, and bond simultaneously should not exhibit incomplete resin infiltration within hybrid layers. We hypothesized that nanoleakage patterns in these systems are artifacts caused by mineral dissolution in mildly acidic silver nitrate. Resin-dentin interfaces bonded with four single-step, self-etch adhesives were examined for nanoleakage by conventional (pH 4.2) and basic ammoniacal (pH 9.5) silver nitrate and prepared for transmission electron microscopy. All adhesives exhibited a reticular mode of nanoleakage within hybrid layers when conventional silver nitrate was used. With ammoniacal silver nitrate, an additional spotted pattern of nanoleakage was observed within adhesive and hybrid layers. The reticular mode of nanoleakage in self-etch adhesives probably represents sites of incomplete water removal that leads to regional suboptimal polymerization. The spotted pattern identified with the use of ammoniacal silver nitrate probably represents potentially permeable regions in the adhesive and hybrid layers that result from the interaction of the basic diamine silver ions with acidic/hydrophilic resin components.

scholarly journals Influence of Air Abrasion and Sonic Technique on Microtensile Bond Strength of One-Step Self-Etch Adhesive on Human Dentin

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baraba Anja ◽  
Dukić Walter ◽  
Chieffi Nicoletta ◽  
Ferrari Marco ◽  
Sonja Pezelj Ribarić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Dentin Surface ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Human Dentin ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

The purpose of thisin vitrostudy was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength of one-step self-etch adhesive to human dentin surface modified with air abrasion and sonic technique and to assess the morphological characteristics of the pretreated dentin surface. The occlusal enamel was removed to obtain a flat dentin surface for thirty-six human molar teeth. The teeth were randomly divided into three experimental groups (n= 12 per group), according to the pretreatment of the dentin: (1) control group, (2) air abrasion group, and (3) sonic preparation group. Microtensile bond strength test was performed on a universal testing machine. Two specimens from each experimental group were subjected to SEM examination. There was no statistically significant difference in bond strength between the three experimental groups (P> 0.05). Mean microtensile bond strength (MPa) values were 35.3 ± 12.8 for control group, 35.8 ± 13.5 for air abrasion group, and 37.7 ± 12.0 for sonic preparation group. The use of air abrasion and sonic preparation with one-step self-etch adhesive does not appear to enhance or impair microtensile bond strength in dentin.

scholarly journals Evaluation of bond strength of one step and two steps self-etch adhesive agents with two different pulp-capping materials

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-82
Author(s):  
Vasilka Rendzova ◽  
Sonja Apostolska ◽  
Emilija Kostadinovska ◽  
Maja Antanasova ◽  
Marina Eftimoska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Calcium Silicate ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Pulp Capping ◽  
Dentin Adhesives ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step ◽  
Calcium Silicate Cements ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Self Etch

Primary purpose of restorative dentistry is to preserve pulp vitality. Besides calcium hydroxide, the application of calcium silicate cements as a material for direct pulp capping has become used recently. The aim of our study was to investigate the influence of materials for direct and indirect pulp capping on the bond strength of composite restorations using two different self etch dentin adhesives. The test was performed on 60 intact molars extracted for periodontal or orthodontic reasons. The prepared samples were divided into the two groups and three subgroups depending on the adhesive and pulp cupping material. Two different calcium silicate based materials were used for pulp cupping. One step and two steps self etch dentin adhesive was applied to prepared specimens depending on the group and with the help of a specially made metal mold set up a composite post. The share bond strength was assessed using a universal testing machine. The results showed significant difference in the share bond strength between the samples treated with TheraCal LC and Biodentine with TheraCal LC being superior to Biodentine.

scholarly journals A 48-month Clinical Evaluation of Fissure Sealants Placed With Different Adhesive Systems

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Karaman ◽  
AR Yazici ◽  
D Tuncer ◽  
E Firat ◽  
S Unluer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retention Rates ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Fissure Sealants ◽  
Evaluation Period ◽  
Fissure Sealant ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step ◽  
Adhesive Application ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARYAimTo compare the retention rates of a nanofilled occlusal fissure sealant placed with the use of an etch-and-rinse or a self-etch adhesive over 48 months.Materials and MethodsThe authors enrolled 244 teeth, each with no restoration or sealant and no detectable caries, from 16 patients. The sealants were placed with Solobond M two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive or Futurabond NR one-step self-etch adhesive by four previously calibrated dentists using a table of random numbers. After completion of the adhesive application, a nanofilled sealant, Grandio Seal, was applied and light-cured. Two other calibrated examiners, who were unaware of which adhesive had been used, independently evaluated the sealants at baseline and at 12-, 24-, 36-, and 48-month recalls. Each sealant was evaluated in terms of caries formation being present or absent and retention using the following criteria: 1 = completely retained, 2 = partial loss, and 3 = total loss. The Pearson χ2 test was used to evaluate differences in retention rates among the sealants used with different adhesives for each evaluation period.ResultsThe retention rates for sealants in the Solobond M group were significantly higher than those in the Futurabond NR group in all periods of evaluation (p&lt;0.05). No statistically significant difference between the retention rates for premolars and molars was found at each evaluation period (p&gt;0.05). There was no new caries formation throughout the 48-month recall period.ConclusionFissure sealants placed with etch-and-rinse adhesive showed better retention rates than those placed with self-etch adhesive.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document