Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Bond strength of total-etch and self-etch dentin adhesive systems on peripheral and central dentinal tissue: a microtensile bond strength test.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2006 May 01; 7(2):26-36.JC

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) of four total-etch adhesives [Excite (EB), Prime&Bond NT (PBNT), Single Bond (SB), and One Coat Bond (OCB)] by comparing them to five self-etching adhesives (Clearfil SE Bond (CSEB), Xeno III (X III), Prompt L-Pop (PLP), AQ Bond (AQB), and Tyrian/One Step plus (TOSP)] at different dentinal areas. In addition the interface between the adhesive resins and dentin was examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Superficial occlusal dentin of extracted human molars was exposed and finished with wet 800-grit silicon carbide paper. A block of composite resin was then bonded to the molar samples with the above adhesives according to the manufacturers' instructions. After 24 hours in water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were sectioned into 1 mm thick slices and divided into two regional subgroups according to their relationship to pulp tissue using visual criteria: pulp center and pulp periphery. The slices were then trimmed for the microtensile bond test and subjected to a tensile force and crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Two-way analysis of variance was performed for statistical analyses. In addition the bond strengths for nine adhesive systems for each dentinal area were compared using the Post-Hoc test. The resin-dentin interfaces for each adhesive system were observed under a SEM.

RESULTS

Mean mu TBS ranged from (25.2 MPa) for TOSP to (48.9 MPa) for PBNT. The bond strengths of total-etch adhesive systems were not significantly different, and were higher than self-etch adhesive systems, except for CSEB (p<0.05). No significant regional difference was observed for all of the nine adhesive systems (p>0.05). SEM observation showed there is not a standard hybridization for adhesive systems.

CONCLUSION

Different dentinal areas may not exhibit as great an influence on bond strengths using new adhesive systems.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey. dtcemalyesilyurt@hotmail.comNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Evaluation Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16685292

Citation

Yeşilyurt, C, and B Bulucu. "Bond Strength of Total-etch and Self-etch Dentin Adhesive Systems On Peripheral and Central Dentinal Tissue: a Microtensile Bond Strength Test." The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, vol. 7, no. 2, 2006, pp. 26-36.
Yeşilyurt C, Bulucu B. Bond strength of total-etch and self-etch dentin adhesive systems on peripheral and central dentinal tissue: a microtensile bond strength test. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2006;7(2):26-36.
Yeşilyurt, C., & Bulucu, B. (2006). Bond strength of total-etch and self-etch dentin adhesive systems on peripheral and central dentinal tissue: a microtensile bond strength test. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 7(2), 26-36.
Yeşilyurt C, Bulucu B. Bond Strength of Total-etch and Self-etch Dentin Adhesive Systems On Peripheral and Central Dentinal Tissue: a Microtensile Bond Strength Test. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2006 May 1;7(2):26-36. PubMed PMID: 16685292.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Bond strength of total-etch and self-etch dentin adhesive systems on peripheral and central dentinal tissue: a microtensile bond strength test. AU - Yeşilyurt,C, AU - Bulucu,B, Y1 - 2006/05/01/ PY - 2006/5/11/pubmed PY - 2006/6/13/medline PY - 2006/5/11/entrez SP - 26 EP - 36 JF - The journal of contemporary dental practice JO - J Contemp Dent Pract VL - 7 IS - 2 N2 - OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) of four total-etch adhesives [Excite (EB), Prime&Bond NT (PBNT), Single Bond (SB), and One Coat Bond (OCB)] by comparing them to five self-etching adhesives (Clearfil SE Bond (CSEB), Xeno III (X III), Prompt L-Pop (PLP), AQ Bond (AQB), and Tyrian/One Step plus (TOSP)] at different dentinal areas. In addition the interface between the adhesive resins and dentin was examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Superficial occlusal dentin of extracted human molars was exposed and finished with wet 800-grit silicon carbide paper. A block of composite resin was then bonded to the molar samples with the above adhesives according to the manufacturers' instructions. After 24 hours in water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were sectioned into 1 mm thick slices and divided into two regional subgroups according to their relationship to pulp tissue using visual criteria: pulp center and pulp periphery. The slices were then trimmed for the microtensile bond test and subjected to a tensile force and crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Two-way analysis of variance was performed for statistical analyses. In addition the bond strengths for nine adhesive systems for each dentinal area were compared using the Post-Hoc test. The resin-dentin interfaces for each adhesive system were observed under a SEM. RESULTS: Mean mu TBS ranged from (25.2 MPa) for TOSP to (48.9 MPa) for PBNT. The bond strengths of total-etch adhesive systems were not significantly different, and were higher than self-etch adhesive systems, except for CSEB (p<0.05). No significant regional difference was observed for all of the nine adhesive systems (p>0.05). SEM observation showed there is not a standard hybridization for adhesive systems. CONCLUSION: Different dentinal areas may not exhibit as great an influence on bond strengths using new adhesive systems. SN - 1526-3711 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16685292/Bond_strength_of_total_etch_and_self_etch_dentin_adhesive_systems_on_peripheral_and_central_dentinal_tissue:_a_microtensile_bond_strength_test_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -