AnIn VitroEvaluation of Leakage of Two Etch and Rinse and Two Self-Etch Adhesives after Thermocycling

Our experiment evaluated the microleakage in resin composite restorations bonded to dental tissues with different adhesive systems. 40 class V cavities were prepared on the facial and lingual surfaces of each tooth with coronal margins in enamel and apical margins in cementum (root dentin). The teeth were restored with Z100 resin composite bonded with different adhesive systems: Scotchbond Multipurpose (SBMP), a 3-step Etch and Rinse adhesive, Adper Scotchbond 1 XT (SB1), a 2-step Etch and Rinse adhesive, AdheSE One (ADSE-1), a 1-step Self-Etch adhesive, and AdheSE (ADSE), a 2-step Self-Etch adhesive. Teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution. When both interfaces were considered, SBMP has exhibited significantly less microleakage than other adhesive systems (resp., for SB1, ADSE-1 and ADSE, , and ). When enamel and dentin interfaces were evaluated separately, (1) for the Self-Etch adhesives, microleakage was found greater at enamel than at dentin interfaces (for ADSE, and for ADSE-1, ); (2) for the Etch and Rinse adhesive systems, there was no significant difference between enamel and dentin interfaces; (3) SBMP was found significantly better than other adhesives both at enamel and dentin interfaces. In our experiment Etch and Rinse adhesives remain better than Self-Etch adhesives at enamel interface. In addition, there was no statistical difference between 1-step (ADSE-1) and 2-step (ADSE) Self-Etch adhesives.

Download Full-text

Effect of Different Adhesion Protocols on the Shear Bond Strength of Universal Adhesive Systems to Sound and Artificial Caries-Affected Dentin

European Journal of General Dentistry ◽

10.1055/s-0041-1732776 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Omnia M. Sami ◽

Essam A. Naguib ◽

Rasha H. Afifi ◽

Shaymaa M. Nagi

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Failure Modes ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Single Bond ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Universal Adhesive ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Self Etch

Abstract Objective Bonding to different dentin substrates influences resin composite restoration outcomes. This study investigated the influence of different adhesion protocols on the shear bond strength of universal adhesive systems to sound and artificial caries-affected dentin (CAD). Materials and Methods Occlusal enamel of 80 premolars were wet grinded to obtain flat midcoronal dentin. Specimens were equally divided according to the substrate condition: sound and CAD by subjecting to pH-cycling for 14 days. Each dentin substrate was bonded with the adhesive systems used in this study: Single Bond universal adhesive or Prime&Bond universal (applied either in etch-and-rinse or self-etch adhesion protocol). Adhesive systems were utilized according to manufacturers’ instructions, then resin composite was built up. Specimens were tested for shear bond strength. The data were analyzed by three-way analysis of variance, and failure modes were determined using stereomicroscope. Results There was no statistically significant difference between the two tested adhesive systems on artificially created CAD with different adhesion protocols. On sound dentin, Single Bond universal, either in the etch-and-rinse or self-etch adhesion protocols, revealed higher statistically significant shear bond strength mean values compared with CAD. Conclusion Single Bond universal adhesive in an etch-and-rinse adhesion protocol improved only bonding to sound dentin, while no added positive effect for the etching step with Prime&Bond universal adhesive was found when bonded to both sound and CAD substrates. The influence of CAD on the performance of the universal adhesives was material-dependent.

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

Two Adhesive Systems-effect on Adhesion to Tooth Structure

Revista de Chimie ◽

10.37358/rc.19.7.7389 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Influence of "soft start" polymerization on marginal sealing in resin composite restorations

Stomatoloski glasnik Srbije ◽

10.2298/sgs0302059b ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 50 (2) ◽

pp. 59-64 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Larisa Blazic ◽

Slavoljub Zivkovic

Keyword(s):

Resin Composite ◽

Nitrate Solution ◽

Silver Nitrate Solution ◽

Class Ii ◽

Composite Resins ◽

Human Teeth ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Soft Start ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Bonding Systems

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marginal microleakage in Class II with different materials in resin composite restorations cured by using "soft start" and standard polymerization techniques. Two adhesive Class II cavities were prepared in 50 human teeth with enamel in-between. Samples were divided into 5 groups and filled with composite resins, compatible flow resin composites and bonding systems. The ocluso-mesial restorations were cured with standard curing technique, and the ocluso-distal restorations were cured with "soft start" curing technique. After thermocycling, the teeth were immersed in silver nitrate solution and sectioned for leakage evaluation. The results pointed out, after "soft start" and standard curing techniques, that the best marginal behavior in Class II restorations was obtained with Tetric Ceram / Tetric Flow composite resins, then with Filtek Z 250 / Filtek Flow, followed by Admira Admira Flow and Point / Revolution composite materials. The deepest dye penetration was found in cavities with Diamond Lite / Diamond Link composite restorations. No statistically significant difference was found in the tested composite resin restorations, whether treated with "soft start" polymerization or with standard polymerization technique, in regard to marginal micro leakage.

Download Full-text

Catechin-based Dentin Pretreatment and the Clinical Performance of a Universal Adhesive: A Two-year Randomized Clinical Trial

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/19-088-c ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 45 (5) ◽

pp. 473-483 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

CAGA Costa ◽

NLG Albuquerque ◽

JS Mendonça ◽

AD Loguercio ◽

VPA Saboia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Retention Rates ◽

Marginal Adaptation ◽

Single Bond ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Self Etch

Clinical Relevance At 24 months, the dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate did not impair the clinical performance of the adhesive Single Bond Universal regardless of the bonding strategy used. SUMMARY Purpose: To evaluate the two-year effect of dentin pretreatment with epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) on the clinical performance of restorations of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) with Single Bond Universal, applied in two different modes (self-etch and etch-and-rinse). Methods and Materials: In this randomized clinical trial, 33 volunteers were selected, and 156 NCCLs were assigned to four groups: ER, etch-and-rinse; ER-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + etch-and-rinse; SE, self-etch; and SE-EGCG, 0.1% EGCG dentin pretreatment + self-etch. The NCCLs were restored with a nanofilled resin composite and evaluated at baseline and at six, 12, 18, and 24 months using FDI criteria for retention, marginal staining, marginal adaptation, caries, and postoperative sensitivity. Two evaluators were blinded to the treatments performed, and impressions were taken for resin replicas to allow indirect observations. Statistical analyses were performed with Kruskal-Wallis and McNemar tests with a significance level of 5%. Results: Six restorations (one from ER, two from SE, one from ER-EGCG, and two from SEEGCG) were lost at 24 months with no significant differences (p>0.05). The retention rates were 97.0% (ER and ER-EGCG), 94.1% (SE), and 94.2% (SE-EGCG). For marginal adaptation, a significant difference was detected between the baseline and 24 months for the SE group (p=0.0313). There were no statistical differences among all other evaluated criteria at 24 months, neither for each group at baseline nor for 24-month comparisons (p>0.05). Conclusions: The pretreatment with EGCG provided no benefit in the clinical performance of the adhesive regardless of the bonding strategy used. In addition, it adds an additional required step to the restorative procedure.

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

Nanoleakage in Hybrid Layer and Acid–Base Resistant Zone at the Adhesive/Dentin Interface

Microscopy and Microanalysis ◽

10.1017/s1431927615015068 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 21 (5) ◽

pp. 1271-1277 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Toru Nikaido ◽

Hamid Nurrohman ◽

Tomohiro Takagaki ◽

Alireza Sadr ◽

Shizuko Ichinose ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Nitrate Solution ◽

Silver Nitrate Solution ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Control Group ◽

Fluorescent Light ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Acid Base ◽

Hybrid Layer ◽

Transmission Electron ◽

Self Etch

AbstractThe aim of interfacial nanoleakage evaluation is to gain a better understanding of degradation of the adhesive–dentin interface. The acid–base resistant zone (ABRZ) is recognized at the bonded interface under the hybrid layer (HL) in self-etch adhesive systems after an acid–base challenge. The purpose of this study was to evaluate nanoleakage in HL and ABRZ using three self-etch adhesives; Clearfil SE Bond (SEB), Clearfil SE One (SEO), and G-Bond Plus (GBP). One of the three adhesives was applied on the ground dentin surface and light cured. The specimens were longitudinally divided into two halves. One half remained as the control group. The others were immersed in ammoniacal silver nitrate solution, followed by photo developing solution under fluorescent light. Following this, the specimens were subjected to acid–base challenges with an artificial demineralization solution (pH4.5) and sodium hypochlorite, and prepared in accordance with common procedures for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) examination. The TEM images revealed silver depositions in HL and ABRZ due to nanoleakage in all the adhesives; however, the extent of nanoleakage was material dependent. Funnel-shaped erosion beneath the ABRZ was observed only in the all-in-one adhesive systems; SEO and GBP, but not in the two-step self-etch adhesive system; SEB.

Download Full-text

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

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/12-181-c ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 38 (4) ◽

pp. 369-375 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

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<0.05). No statistically significant difference between the retention rates for premolars and molars was found at each evaluation period (p>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.

Download Full-text

Effect of Silver Diamine Fluoride on Microtensile Bond Strength to Dentin

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/11-344-l ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 37 (6) ◽

pp. 610-616 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

RL Quock ◽

JA Barros ◽

SW Yang ◽

SA Patel

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Bonding Agent ◽

Microtensile Bond Strength ◽

Silver Diamine Fluoride ◽

Microtensile Testing ◽

Etch And Rinse ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Diamond Saw ◽

Self Etch

SUMMARY The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of the cariostatic and preventive agent silver diamine fluoride (SDF) on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to dentin. Forty-two caries-free, extracted molars were flattened occlusally and apically using a diamond saw, and the exposed occlusal dentin was polished with a series of silicon carbide papers, all under water irrigation. The teeth were then randomly divided into six groups of seven teeth each that were treated as follows: 1) Peak SE self-etch bonding agent; 2) 12% SDF + Peak SE; 3) 38% SDF + Peak SE; 4) Peak LC etch-and-rinse bonding agent; 5) 12% SDF + Peak LC; and 6) 38% SDF + Peak LC. Four-millimeter buildups of Amelogen Plus were incrementally placed on all teeth; after a 24-hour storage period in distilled water, the specimens were sectioned perpendicular to the adhesive interface to produce beams of cross-sectional surface area measuring approximately 1 mm2. The beams were placed on a microtensile testing machine, which utilized a single-speed pump motor and force gauge at 20 kgf × 0.01 second to record maximum tensile force before failure occurred. Two-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey tests were performed to compare the effects of the SDF on microtensile bond strength, with statistical significance set at α = 0.05. None of the experimental groups treated with different concentrations of SDF showed a significant difference in bond strength compared to the control groups, and there was no significant difference in bond strength between self-etch and etch-and-rinse groups. However, the effect of SDF on self-etch bonded teeth compared to etch-and-rinse bonded teeth was statistically significant (p=0.0363), specifically at the 12% concentration. SDF does not adversely affect the bond strength of resin composite to noncarious dentin.

Download Full-text