scholarly journals The Effect of Different Dental Adhesive Systems on Hybrid Layer Qualities

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-37
Author(s):  
Ku SH ◽  
Tan YS ◽  
Yahya NA
2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (7) ◽  
pp. 2608-2613
Author(s):  
Larisa Simona Deac ◽  
Kamel Earar ◽  
Adela Loredana Colceriu Burtea ◽  
Alexandra Stefania Berghe ◽  
Aurora Antoniac ◽  
...  

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.


Author(s):  
Taíse Alessandra Hanzen ◽  
Mario Felipe Gutiérrez ◽  
Thalita de Paris Matos ◽  
Alexandra Mara de Paula ◽  
Fabiana Suelen Figueredo de Siqueira ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
César Augusto Galvão Arrais ◽  
Marcelo Giannini

The formation of a hybrid layer is the main bonding mechanism of current dentin-bonding systems. This study evaluated the morphology and thickness of the resin-infiltrated dentinal layer after the application of adhesive systems. The dentin-bonding agents were evaluated on flat dentinal preparations confected on the occlusal surfaces of human teeth. The test specimens were prepared and inspected under scanning electron microscopy at a magnification of X 2,000. The adhesive systems were responsible for different hybrid layer thicknesses (p < 0.05), and the mean values were: for Scotchbond MP Plus (SM), 7.41 ± 1.24mum; for Single Bond (SB), 5.55 ± 0.82mum; for Etch & Prime 3.0 (EP), 3.86 ± 1.17mum; and for Clearfil SE Bond (CB), 1.22 ± 0.45mum. The results suggest that the conventional three-step adhesive system (SM) was responsible for the thickest hybrid layer, followed by the one-bottle adhesive (SB). The self-etching adhesives, EP and CB, produced the formation of the thinnest hybrid layers.


10.2341/05-53 ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Loguercio ◽  
A. Reis ◽  
G. Bortoli ◽  
R. Patzlaft ◽  
S. Kenshima ◽  
...  

Clinical Relevance Etch & rinse systems showed better initial interfacial adaptation than self-etch systems. The differences disappeared after 6-months water storage. The thicker the hybrid layer formed by self-etching adhesives, the lower the immediate gap formation.


1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.A de Souza Costa ◽  
M.A Vaerten ◽  
C.A Edwards ◽  
C.T Hanks

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Pereira Nogueira ◽  
V Cavalli ◽  
PCS Liporoni ◽  
MA do Rego

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate hybrid layer thickness of primary molars sectioned with diamond, carbide and ultrasonic CVD burs. Study Design: The occlusal enamel surfaces of ten molars were removed and superficial dentin was exposed. Three standardized cavities were prepared at mesial, central and distal exposed dentin with diamond, carbide and ultrasonic CVD burs, respectively. A self-etching adhesive system (Adhese, Ivoclar/Vivadent) was applied to prepared cavities and composite resin Z100 (3M/ESPE) was inserted according to manufacturers’ instructions to hybridized dentin. Samples were lightcured and the crown was sectioned mesio-distally dividing the restored cavities in two halves which were observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM), in order to quantitatively evaluate hybrid layer thickness (µm). Three repeated measures were performed at mesial, central and distal sites and mean values obtained were submitted to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results: Data (mean ± sd) obtained were (µm): 2.69 (0.44), 3.38 (1.23) and 2.72 (1.18) for diamond, carbide and CVD burs, respectively. No differences were observed among groups (p ≯ 0.05). The adhesive systems promoted mechanical retention, uniform and continuous hybrid layer and resin tags formation at all dentin sites for all instruments tested. Conclusion: The results suggest that the minimally invasive cavities prepared with diamond, carbide and CVD for ultrasound, promoted hybrid layer formation with a similar thickness regardless the bur used.


2007 ◽  
Vol 138 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osnat Feuerstein ◽  
Shlomo Matalon ◽  
Hagay Slutzky ◽  
Ervin I. Weiss

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document