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

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. METHODS: Fifteen 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). A standardized smear layer was created with #600 grit silicon-carbide paper. The adhesive systems were applied as per manufacturer recommendations, with the exception of the Adper SE Plus system, which was triple-polymerized. Composite resin blocks (5 mm) were placed on the dentin surface. The specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37ºC. Using a flexible diamond disc (EXTEC, Enfield, CT, USA), toothpick-like specimens with an adhesive area of less than 1 mm² were obtained. A microtensile bond test was then carried out using a universal testing machine (KRATOS) with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test were used for comparisons. RESULTS: The bond strength values obtained with each adhesive system were as follows: XP Bond, 96.24 MPa; Adper Single Bond, 72.39 MPa; Adper SE Plus, 49.91 MPa. CONCLUSION: In terms of bond strength to dentin, conventional adhesives outperform self-etching systems.

Download Full-text

Effect of Different Bonding Strategies on Adhesion to Deep and Superficial Permanent Dentin

European Journal of Dentistry ◽

10.1055/s-0039-1697818 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 04 (02) ◽

pp. 110-117 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Rafael Eduardo Fernandes Pegado ◽

Flávia Lucisano Botelho do Amaral ◽

Flávia Martão Flório ◽

Roberta Tarkany Basting

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Microtensile Bond Strength ◽

Universal Testing ◽

One Step ◽

The One

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of different bonding strategies on the microtensile bond strength to deep and superficial permanent dentin.Methods: Forty-eight teeth were randomly flattened according to the dentin depth: superficial dentin (SD) and deep dentin (DD). Subsequently, three adhesive systems were applied (n=8): an etchand- rinse (Adper Single Bond 2 - SB), a “mild” two-step self-etching (Clearfil SE Bond - SE) and a one-step self-etching adhesive system (Futurabond – FB). Each specimen was restored with a composite resin and sectioned into 1.0-mm2 thick slabs. After 24 hours, resin-dentin sticks were submitted to tensile stress in a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). Data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test at a level of 0.05%.Results: Superficial dentin showed the highest microtensile bond strength values, which differed statistically from those obtained in the deep dentin, irrespective of the adhesive system used. FB yielded the highest bond strength values, which were statistically similar to the bond strength values of SE, but statistically different from those obtained when the SB adhesive was used.Conclusions: Bond strength obtained in superficial dentin was significantly higher than in deep dentin, for all adhesive systems tested. Adhesion was affected by the different bonding strategies: the one-step, low pH, acetone-based self-etching adhesive promoted the higher bond strength values, which were statistically similar to those obtained with the two-step, water-based self-etching adhesive. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:110-117)

Download Full-text

Effect Of Chitosan Treatment On Shear Bond Strength Of Composite To Deep Dentin Using Self-Etch And Total-Etch Adhesive Systems

Brazilian Dental Science ◽

10.14295/bds.2021.v24i2.2440 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 24 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Fateme Vasei ◽

Farahnaz Sharafeddin

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Self Etch

Objective: To assess the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin composite to deep dentin, using 1 and 2.5% chitosan pretreatment as well as different adhesive systems. Material and Methods: 80 human maxillary molars were randomly divided to eight groups according to the type of adhesive system and dentin pretreatment (n = 10): I) two-step self-etch system (Clearfil SE bond); II) two-step etch-andrinse system (Adper single bond 2); III) 2.5% chitosan + Clearfil SE bond; IV) 2.5% chitosan +etch + Adper single bond 2; V) etch + 2.5% chitosan + Adper single bond 2; VI) 1% chitosan + Clearfil SE bond; VII) 1% chitosan + etch + Adper single bond 2; VIII) etch + 1% chitosan + Adper single bond 2 (chitosan solution (w/v): 2.5 g and 1 g of chitosan (Sigma Aldrich, USA) was dissolved in 100 ml of 1% acetic acid). Plastic molds were positioned on dentin and filled with composite (Z350, 3M ESPE, USA). SBS (MPa) was tested using a universal testing machine. ANOVA tests, Tukey’s test, and independent t test were used to analyze data (p < 0.05). Results: The highest SBS value among self-etch groups was observed with 1% chitosan (p = 0.001). In the etch-and-rinse group, the SBS of 1% chitosan was significantly lower than the other groups. Chitosan treatment following acid etching led to higher SBS in comparison to when chitosan was applied before etching, with the significant difference in 1% concentration (p = 0.030). A predominance of mix fractures was observed in dentin. Conclusion: Improved dentin bond strength can be achieved through immediate dentin pretreatment with 1% chitosan in self-etch adhesive systems. Chitosan Pretreatment may not be advantageous for etch-and-rinse adhesive systems. Keywords Adhesive system; Chitosan; Deep dentin; Shear strength.

Download Full-text

Influence of Different Etching Modes on Bond Strength to Enamel using Universal Adhesive Systems

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice ◽

10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1937 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 17 (10) ◽

pp. 820-825 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Mateus R Tonetto ◽

Ana CS Diniz ◽

Larissa M Pinheiro ◽

Lauber J dos Santosh Almeida ◽

Carlos RG Torres ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Statistical Tests ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Universal Adhesive ◽

Universal System ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Self Etch

ABSTRACT Introduction The adhesive systems and the techniques currently used are designed to provide a more effective adhesion with reduction of the protocol application. The objective of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of universal adhesive systems on enamel in different etching modes (self-etch and total etch). Materials and methods The mesial and distal halves of 52 bovine incisors, healthy, freshly extracted, were used and divided into seven experimental groups (n = 13). The enamel was treated in accordance with the following experimental conditions: FUE-Universal System – Futurabond U (VOCO) with etching; FUWE – Futurabond U (VOCO) without etching; SB-Total Etch System – Single Bond 2 (3M); SBUE-Universal System – Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE) with etching; SBUWE – Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE) without etching; CLE-Self-etch System – Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) was applied with etching; CLWE – Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) without etching. The specimens were made using the composite spectrum TPH (Dentsply) and stored in distilled water (37 ± 1°C) for 1 month. The microshear test was performed using the universal testing machine EMIC DL 2000 with the crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute. The bond strength values were analyzed using statistical tests (Kruskal–Wallis test and Mann–Whitney test) with Bonferroni correction. Results There was no statistically significant difference between groups (p < 0.05), where FUE (36.83 ± 4.9 MPa) showed the highest bond strength values and SBUWE (18.40 ± 2.2 MPa) showed the lowest bond strength values. The analysis of adhesive interface revealed that most failures occurred between the interface composite resin and adhesive. Conclusion The universal adhesive system used in dental enamel varies according to the trademark, and the previous enamel etching for universal systems and the self-etch both induced greater bond strength values. Clinical significance Selective enamel etching prior to the application of a universal adhesive system is a relevant strategy for better performance bonding. How to cite this article Diniz ACS, Bandeca MC, Pinheiro LM, dos Santos Almeida LJr, Torres CRG, Borges AH, Pinto SCS, Tonetto MR, De Jesus Tavarez RR, Firoozmand LM. Influence of Different Etching Modes on Bond Strength to Enamel using Universal Adhesive Systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(10):820-825.

Download Full-text

Aplikasi klorheksidin glukonat 2%pada dentin tidak mempengaruhi kuat rekat geserkomposit resinyangmenggunakansistem adesif self etch (2% Chlorhexidine gluconate application on dentine does not affect bond strength of resin composite using self etch adhesive system)

Journal of Dentomaxillofacial Science ◽

10.15562/jdmfs.v13i1.379 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

pp. 7

Author(s):

Dewi Puspitasari ◽

Andi Soufyan ◽

Ellyza Herda

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Group I ◽

Self Etch

Composite resin is a widely used aesthetic restoration. The restoration can fail due to secondary caries. Chlorhexidinegluconate 2% is used as a cavity disinfectant to eliminate microorganisms on the prepared cavity and to prevent thesecondary caries. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of chlorhexidine gluconate 2% to the bondstrength of composite resin with self etch system adhesive on dentine. Sixteen specimens of buccal dentine of premolarscrown are divided into 2 different groups. Group I: Clearfil SE Bond self-etch primer was applied for 20 seconds,Clearfil SE Bond bonding was applied for 5 seconds and polymerized for 10 seconds. Composite resin was constructedincrementally and polymerized for 20 seconds. Group II: prior to self etch primer application as in group I,chlorhexidine gluconate 2% was applied for 15 seconds. Shear bond strength was tested using Testing machine andanalyzed with unpaired T test. The highest shear bond strength was obtained by applying chlorhexidine gluconate 2%.The study concludes that chlorhexidine gluconate 2% application to dentine did not affect significantly to the bondstrength composite resin using self etch adhesive systems.

Download Full-text

Microshear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Systems to Dentin

Frontiers in Dentistry ◽

10.18502/fid.v16i4.2085 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Sara Valizadeh ◽

Aida Moradi ◽

Mansooreh Mirazei ◽

Hooman Amiri ◽

Mohammad Javad Kharazifard

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Microshear Bond Strength ◽

Self Etch ◽

Composite Cylinders

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of various adhesive systems to dentin. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro experimental study, 60 sound human third molars were divided into four groups. Dentin discs were prepared of middle-third dentin measuring 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness. Dentin surfaces were bonded with one of the four types of adhesives: (A) Single Bond (3M ESPE), Scotchbond Universal (3M ESPE) in etch and rinse (B) and self-etch (C) modes and (D) Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Noritake Dental). After the application of adhesive systems according to the manufacturers’ instructions, composite cylinders (Vit-l-escence) were bonded to dentin surfaces. The μSBS test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Results: The µSBS was the highest in self-etch Scotchbond Universal (15.8±6.08 MPa) followed by Clearfil SE Bond (15.24±4.6 MPa), etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal (11.68±4.07MPa) and Single Bond (11.24±3.74 MPa). A significant difference was only found between Single Bond and etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal groups (P=0.04). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, application of Scotchbond Universal in self-etch mode provides a reliable bond to dentin.

Download Full-text

Microshear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Systems to Dentin

Frontiers in Dentistry ◽

10.18502/fid.v14i4.2085 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Sara Valizadeh ◽

Aida Moradi ◽

Mansooreh Mirazei ◽

Hooman Amiri ◽

Mohammad Javad Kharazifard

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Microshear Bond Strength ◽

Self Etch ◽

Composite Cylinders

Download Full-text

Influence of adhesive system and bevel preparation on fracture strength of teeth restored with composite resin

Brazilian Dental Journal ◽

10.1590/s0103-64402010000400007 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 21 (4) ◽

pp. 327-331 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Fábio Herrmann Coelho-de-Souza ◽

Analice da Cunha Rocha ◽

Alessandro Rubini ◽

Celso Afonso Klein-Júnior ◽

Flávio Fernando Demarco

Keyword(s):

Fracture Strength ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Butt Joint ◽

Fracture Pattern ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Exact Test ◽

Universal Testing

The aim of this study was to evaluate the fracture strength of teeth with different cavosurface margin cavity preparations and restored with composite resin and different adhesive systems. Eighty premolars were randomly divided in 8 groups, as follow: G1- sound teeth; G2- MOD preparation (no restoration); G3- Adper Single Bond without bevel preparation (butt joint); G4- Adper Single Bond with bevel preparation; G5- Adper Single Bond with chamfer preparation; G6- Clearfil SE Bond without bevel (butt joint); G7- Clearfil SE Bond with bevel preparation; G8- Clearfil SE Bond with chamfer preparation. The adhesive systems were applied according to manufacturers’ instructions. Composite resin (Filtek Z250) was incrementally placed in all cavities. After 24 h, the specimens were tested in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey’s test (fracture strength) and Fisher’s exact test (fracture pattern). The confidence level was set at 95% for all tests. Prepared and non-restored teeth showed the worst performance and G4 exhibited the highest fracture strength among all groups (p<0.05). In conclusion, all restorative treatments were able to recover the fracture strength of non-restored teeth to levels similar to those of sound teeth. Using a total-etch adhesive system with bevel preparation significantly improved the resistance to fracture.

Download Full-text

Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems with Different Solvents to Dry and Wet Dentin

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice ◽

10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1261 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 9-13 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Daphne Câmara Barcellos ◽

Carlos Rocha Gomes Torres ◽

Melissa Aline da Silva ◽

Patrícia Maria Rangel ◽

Clovis Pagani

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Surface Treatment ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Universal Testing Machine ◽

Universal Testing ◽

Microtensile Test ◽

Adhesive Factor

ABSTRACT Aim This study evaluates bond strength between dentin and composite using adhesives with different solvents to dry and wet dentin. Materials and methods Ninety bovine incisors were used; the vestibular surfaces were worn by the exposure of an area with a diameter of 4 mm of dentin. The specimens were divided into 6 groups, according to the type of adhesive used and hydratation stals: Group SB-wet: Single Bond 2 in wet dentin, Group SBdry: Single Bond 2 in dry dentin, Group SL-wet: Solobond M in wet dentin, Group SL-dry: Solobond M in dentin dry. Group XPwet: XP Bond in wet dentin, Group XP-dry: XP Bond in dentin dry. They were cut to obtain specimens in the shape of stick with 1 × 1 mm and subjected to microtensile test in universal testing machine with a cross speed of 1mm/min. The data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey's tests (5%). Results ANOVA showed significant differences for surface treatment and interaction, but no difference was found for adhesive factor. The Tukey's test showed that the samples with wet dentin shown higher values of bond strength. Conclusion The adhesive did not influence in the bond strength. The groups with wet dentin showed higher values of bond strength than groups with dry dentin. How to cite this article Silva MA, Rangel PM, Barcellos DC, Pagani C, Torres CRG. Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems with Different Solvents to Dry and Wet Dentin. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(1):9-13.

Download Full-text

Bonding performance of self-etch adhesives to enamel bleached with different peroxide concentrations

Brazilian Dental Journal ◽

10.1590/0103-6440202104046 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 32 (5) ◽

pp. 96-104

Author(s):

Ma’an M Nayif ◽

Masayuki Otsuki ◽

Junji Tagami

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Significant Interaction ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Bonding Performance ◽

Universal Testing ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Level Of Significance ◽

Self Etch

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the micro-shear bond strength (µSBS) of one and two steps self-etch adhesive systems after enamel bleaching with photo-activated bleaching systems of different hydrogen peroxide (HP) concentration. Occlusal enamel of forty intact human molars were flattened and assigned into four groups. GI Unbleached, GII, GIII, and GIV were bleached with Pyrenees (3.5% HP), GC TiON (20% HP), and Hi-Lite (35% HP) respectively. Enamel treatment with one and two steps self-etch adhesives (Clearfil S3 Bond- S3, and Clearfil SE Bond-SE) then micro-tubes were fixed on enamel and filled with AP-X composite (n=5). Bond was tested with the universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests at 5 % level of significance. The µSBS was significantly different between adhesives (F=154.46; p<0.05) and bleaching systems (F=77.33; p<0.05) with significant interaction. Specimens bonded with S3 shows a significantly lower μSBS than those bonded with SE (p<0.05) in all groups. For both adhesives the bleached groups demonstrate lower µSBS than unbleached except specimens bleached with Pyrenees and bonded with SE (p>0.05). A significant difference was observed between groups of the bleaching systems (p<0.05). Different peroxide concentrations photo-activated bleaching systems adversely affect μSBS of one and two steps self-etch adhesives. Low concentration system (Pyrenees) does not influence the bond strength of two steps adhesive.

Download Full-text

Tensile bond strength of different adhesive systems to enamel and dentin

Brazilian Dental Journal ◽

10.1590/s0103-64402007000200007 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 18 (2) ◽

pp. 124-128 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Wanessa Christine Souza-Zaroni ◽

Letícia Caliento Seixas ◽

Juliane Cristina Ciccone-Nogueira ◽

Daniela Thomazatti Chimello ◽

Regina Guenka Palma-Dibb

Keyword(s):

Statistical Analysis ◽

Bond Strength ◽

Surface Treatment ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Testing Machine ◽

Tensile Bond Strength ◽

Single Bond ◽

Substrate Type ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Universal Testing

The aim of this study was to assess the tensile bond strength of four adhesive systems to enamel and dentin: Clearfil Liner Bond 2V - C, Prime&Bond NT/NRC - PB, Single Bond - SB and All Bond 2 -AB. For such purpose, 40 sound human molars were selected. Crowns were bisected in a mesiodistal direction and each half was ground until flat enamel (E) or dentin (D) surfaces were obtained. A total of 80 specimens were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20, 10 in enamel and 10 in dentin). After surface treatment, a composite resin (Z250; 3M) cone was prepared using a split Teflon® matrix. Bond strength was tested in an universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). Bond strength means in MPa were: C - E: 18.66 (±2.67) and D: 21.62 (±5.29); PB - E: 18.13 (±2.96) and D: 3.19 (±1.40); SB - E: 20.06 (±6.11) and D: 16.95 (±2.57); AB - E: 18.20 (±3.94) and D: 15.94 (±4.72). Statistical analysis of data by two-way ANOVA showed that C presented the best results followed by SB. In conclusion, among the tested materials, Clearfil Liner Bond 2V self-etching primer adhesive syetem had the best performance. The substrate type influenced bond strength, being higher to enamel.

Download Full-text