Bonding Performance of Universal Adhesive Systems Applied in Etch-and-Rinse and Self-Etch Strategies on Natural Dentin Caries

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 510-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
V Hass ◽  
AFM Cardenas ◽  
FSF Siqueira ◽  
RR Pacheco ◽  
PMW Zago ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adhesive System ◽  
Strength Analysis ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Hybrid Layer ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Universal System ◽  
Dentin Caries ◽  
Bonding Performance ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Objective: This study investigated the bonding performance of three universal adhesive systems applied using etch-and-rinse (ER) or self-etch (SE) strategies on natural dentin caries. Materials and Methods: Sixty human third molars were selected for this study: 30 naturally carious (CAD) and 30 sound (SD) teeth. The dentin surfaces were exposed, and teeth were randomly assigned to each evaluated adhesive system: Scotchbond Universal (SBU), Futurabond U (FBU), and Prime&Bond Elect (PBE) and an adhesive strategy: ER or SE. The adhesive systems were applied following the manufacturer's instructions, and the teeth were restored using a resin composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra, 3M). After 24 hours (distilled water at 37°C), samples were sectioned and evaluated using microtensile bond strength analysis (μTBS), micro-Raman spectroscopy to evaluate the degree of conversion within the hybrid layer (DC), and scanning electronic microscopy (SEM) to describe the morphology of the hybrid layer. The μTBS and DC data were analyzed using three-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test for means comparison (α=0.05). The SEM images were analyzed qualitatively. Results: Reduced μTBS values were observed when comparing CAD with SD, regardless of adhesive system or strategy (p<0.0001). SBU showed statistically higher μTBS for both dentin substrates and strategies (p<0.0001). Furthermore, SBU showed greater integrity of the hybrid layer and resin tag formation compared with FBU and PBE. Mean μTBS values for FBU were higher for SD in the SE mode, whereas higher mean μTBS values were observed for CAD in the ER mode, both compared with PBE (p<0.001). Conclusion: Bonding performance is reduced on a caries-affected substrate. The ER strategy was not able to improve the bonding performance on natural CAD for universal adhesive systems. Improved bonding performance was obtained when using the Scotchbond Universal system.

Does Bonding Approach Influence the Bond Strength of Universal Adhesive to Dentin of Primary Teeth?

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tathiane Larissa Lenzi ◽  
Fabio Zovico Maxnuck Soares ◽  
Rachel de Oliveira Rocha
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Primary Tooth ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Tooth Dentin ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
One Way Anova

Objective: To evaluate the effect of bonding strategy on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of a new universal adhesive system to primary tooth dentin. Study design: Flat dentin surfaces from 25 primary molars were assigned to 5 groups according to the adhesive and bonding approach: Adper Single Bond 2 (two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive) and Clearfil SE Bond (two-step self-etch system), as controls; Scotchbond Universal Adhesive–self-etch, dry or wet-bonding etch-and-rinse strategies. Composite buildups were constructed and the teeth were sectioned to obtain bonded sticks (0.8 mm2) to be tested under tension at 1mm/min. The μTBS means were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α = 0.05). Failure mode was evaluated using a stereomicroscope (400×). Results: Universal adhesive applied following both dry and wet-bonding etch-and-rinse strategies showed similar bond strength compared with control adhesive systems. Self-etch approach resulted in the lowest μTBS values. For all groups, adhesive/mixed failure prevailed. The percentage of premature debonded specimens was higher when the universal adhesive was used as self-etch mode. Conclusion: The universal adhesive does not share the same versatility of being used in the etch-and-rinse and self-etch approaches; however, the use of the new adhesive following either wet or dry-bonding may be a suitable option as alternative to two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive protocol.

scholarly journals Cytotoxicity of Etch-and-Rinse, Self-Etch, and Universal Dental Adhesive Systems in Fibroblast Cell Line 3T3

Scanning ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmine Mendes Pupo ◽  
Cintia Fernanda de Freitas Bernardo ◽  
Francielly Fernanda de Freitas A. de Souza ◽  
Milton Domingos Michél ◽  
Camila Nunes de Morais Ribeiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Viability ◽  
Culture Medium ◽  
Fibroblast Cell ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Negative Control ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Glass Cover ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch

The aim of this study was to evaluate in fibroblast cultures the direct cytotoxic effects of etch-and-rinse, self-etch, and universal adhesive systems. The sterile glass cover slips (n=3) were then immersed in culture medium to obtain the eluates for the experimental groups: (1) Adper™ Single Bond 2; (2) Ambar; (3) Adper™ Scotchbond™ Multi-Purpose; (4) Scotchbond™ Universal; (5) Ambar Universal; and (6) OptiBond All-In-One. As a negative control, sterile glass cover slips were immersed in culture medium only. After 24 h, the eluate obtained was applied on fibroblast culture. Cell viability and cell morphology were evaluated by MTT assay and SEM, respectively. Data were analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests (α=0.05). All adhesive systems except universal reduced cell viability in 3T3 cells to between 26.04% and 56.57%, and Scotchbond Universal and Ambar Universal reduced cell viability to 2.13% and 3.57%, respectively, when compared to the negative control. Cytoplasmic membrane shrinkage and cell-free areas with residual membrane fragments from dead cells were observed. In conclusion, improvements in universal adhesive system formulations and their mechanisms of action are not accompanied by increased toxicity compared with those in other systems, warranting commitment to the use of these dentin-pulp complexes.

Bonding Performance of Simplified Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions at 2-year Follow-up: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 476-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
RF Zanatta ◽  
TM Silva ◽  
MALR Esper ◽  
E Bresciani ◽  
SEP Gonçalves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Universal System ◽  
Friedman Analysis ◽  
Bonding Performance ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the bonding performance of a universal adhesive used according to self-etching or etch-and-rinse protocols in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) and to compare the two protocols with their respective gold standard techniques. Methods and Materials: This randomized, double-blind clinical study enrolled 34 participants who met the inclusion criteria, 29 of whom returned after two years. They received 152 restorations bonded with one of the three adhesives (Scotchbond Universal Adhesive, Adper Single Bond 2, or Clearfil SE Bond) and one of the two bonding techniques tested. The NCCLs were restored with nanocomposite resin (Filtek Supreme). Final contours were done with a fine diamond rotary instrument and polished with rubber points. The restorations were evaluated using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria at baseline (seven days after the restoration procedure), 6, 12, and 24 months. Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman analysis of variance, and least significant difference tests were performed. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in esthetics or the functional and biological evaluated criteria among the adhesive systems and techniques. Conclusions: The Scotchbond Universal system behaved similarly to the conventional etch-and-rinse or self-etching systems in all the adhesion strategies in the evaluated periods.

scholarly journals Influence of Solvents and Composition of Etch-and-Rinse and Self-Etch Adhesive Systems on the Nanoleakage within the Hybrid Layer

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joao Cardoso Ferreira ◽  
Patricia Teixeira Pires ◽  
Alvaro Ferreira Azevedo ◽  
Sofia Arantes Oliveira ◽  
Paulo Ribeiro Melo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adhesive System ◽  
Mean Value ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Hybrid Layer ◽  
Backscattered Electrons ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Human Dentin ◽  
Group B ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Influence Of Solvents

ABSTRACT Aim The goal of this study was to evaluate nanoleakage within the hybrid layer yielded by etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems, with different solvents and compositions. Materials and methods Four adhesives were applied onto 20 human dentin disks: group A: Adper Scotchbond 1XT™ (3M ESPE), group B: One Coat Bond® (Coltène Whaledent), group C: AdheSE® (Ivoclar Vivadent) and group D: Xeno-V® (Dentsply). The samples were immersed in aqueous ammoniacal silver nitrate for 24 hour, prepared and observed under field-emission scanning electron microscopy with backscattered electrons. Microphotographs were scanned and data were processed. The mean value and standard deviation were calculated. KruskalWallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used (p < 0.05). Results All the adhesives showed nanoleakage within the hybrid layer: Adper Scotchbond 1XT™ (218.5 μm ± 52.6 μm), One Coat Bond® (139.6 μm ± 79.0 μm), AdheSE® (92.7 μm ± 64.8 μm) and Xeno-V® (251.0 μm ± 85.2 μm). AdheSE® yielded less nanoleakage than Adper Scotchbond-1XT™ (p = 0.003) and than Xeno-V® (p = 0.007). No other statistically significant differences were detected. Conclusion Two-step self-etch adhesive system (AdheSE®) might contribute for lower nanoleakage deposition and thus better performance in dentin adhesion. Clinical significance The two-step self-etch adhesive system showed the lowest nanoleakage deposition compared with the other adhesive systems evaluated, which seems to indicate a better behavior when a restoration is performed in dentin and possibly can lead to a durable adhesion along time. How to cite this article Ferreira JC, Pires PT, Azevedo AF, Oliveira SA, Melo PR, Silva MJ. Influence of Solvents and Composition of Etch-and-Rinse and Self-Etch Adhesive Systems on the Nanoleakage within the Hybrid Layer. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(4):691-699.

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

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. 820-825 ◽  
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.

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.

Effect of Different Protocols in Preconditioning With EDTA in Sclerotic Dentin and Enamel Before Universal Adhesives Applied in Self-etch Mode

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
EC Martini ◽  
SO Parreiras ◽  
MF Gutierrez ◽  
AD Loguercio ◽  
A Reis
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Etching Pattern ◽  
Bonding Performance ◽  
Universal Adhesives ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Main Factor

SUMMARY Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different protocols of 17% ethylene diamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) conditioning on the etching pattern and immediate bond strength of universal adhesives to enamel and sclerotic dentin. Methods and Materials: Forty bovine teeth with sclerotic dentin and 20 human third molars were randomly divided into eight groups resulting from the combination of the main factors surface treatment (none, two-minute EDTA conditioning manual application, 30-second EDTA manual application, 30-second EDTA sonic application) and adhesives systems (Scotchbond Universal Adhesive [SBU] and Prime & Bond Elect [PBE]). Resin-dentin and enamel-dentin bond specimens were prepared and tested under the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and microshear bond strength (μSBS) tests, respectively. The etching pattern produced on the unground enamel and the sclerotic dentin surfaces under the different protocols and adhesive systems was evaluated under scanning electron microscopy. Results: For enamel, only the main factor adhesive was significant (p&lt;0.0001), with SBU showing the highest μSBS. In sclerotic dentin, the lowest mean was observed for the group without EDTA application and the highest mean in the group with EDTA application with the sonic device for 30 seconds. Regardless of the EDTA protocol, the highest means of μTBS were observed for SBU (p&lt;0.05). Conclusions: EDTA conditioning improves the bonding performance of universal adhesives in the self-etch mode on sclerotic dentin, mainly when applied for 30 seconds with the aid of a sonic device. EDTA pretreatment also improves the retentive etching pattern of enamel, but it does not result in higher enamel bond strength.

scholarly journals The effects of different surface contaminators on the shear bond strength of a universal adhesive system to dentin: an experimental study

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Bahari ◽  
Siavash Savadi Oskoee ◽  
Mohammad Esmaeel Ebrahimi Chaharom ◽  
Nasim Molayi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Aluminium Chloride ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Human Teeth ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Composite Samples

Background. Contamination of dentin surface is one of the common problems in restorative dentistry. The aim was to investigate the effects of different surface contaminators on the dentin shear bond strength (SBS) of universal adhesive system (UAS) applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) strategies. Methods. One hundred forty-four maxillary anterior sound human teeth were divided into six groups based on the types of surface contaminators: no surface contaminator (control) and experimental groups contaminated with blood, saliva, aluminium chloride (ALC), ferric sulphate (FS), and caries disclosing agent (CDA). Then, each group was further subdivided into two, based on the application strategy of UAS (ER and SE). After applying the adhesive according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and bonding cylindrical composite samples, the SBS was measured. The data were analysed using two-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test and t test (P<0.05). Results. The SBS in all contaminated groups, except for CDA, was significantly lower in both ER and SE strategies compared to control group (P<0.05). A comparison between the application strategies revealed that ER and SE were only significantly different in the FS contaminated group (P<0.05). Conclusion. All tested contaminators, except CDA, significantly decreased SBS of UAS in both ER and SE strategies.

scholarly journals Update on Enamel Bonding Strategies

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takaaki Sato ◽  
Tomohiro Takagaki ◽  
Takashi Hatayama ◽  
Toru Nikaido ◽  
Junji Tagami
Keyword(s):  
Optimal Strategies ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Combined System ◽  
Concise Review ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Acid Etch ◽  
Universal Adhesives ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Self Etch

Optimal strategies for the application of an adhesive differ between enamel and dentin because of the differences in their composition. The development of adhesive systems has mainly focused on the bonding of dentin, rather than on the enamel, by etching with phosphoric acid (PA). Dental adhesive technologies continue to rapidly advance, and various adhesive systems have been developed since the study of Buonocore in 1955. He introduced the enamel acid-etch technique. Then, the etch-and-rinse (ER) system was developed, and subsequently, the self-etch (SE) system. Universal adhesives are a new generation of one-bottle SE adhesives that can be applied with either ER mode or SE mode, or a combined system involving selective enamel etching mode. Since the combination of PA etching and the SE system differs from conventional ER systems, the enamel bonding strategy should be carefully considered. This concise review of the literature on reliable enamel bonding strategies should prove helpful to clinicians to choose an appropriate adhesive system to achieve optimal clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals SEM-EDS nanoleakage evaluation of universal-adhesive-systems with etch-and-rinse and self-etch approach

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (sup1) ◽  
pp. 97-97
Author(s):  
Mihai Certan ◽  
Mário Polido ◽  
José Brito ◽  
Ana Cristina Azul
Keyword(s):  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document