Article

Can the durability of one-step self-etch adhesives be improved by double application or by an extra layer of hydrophobic resin?

Department of Restorative Dentistry, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Avenida General Carlos Cavalcanti, 4748, Bloco M, Sala 64A, Uvaranas, Ponta Grossa, PR 84030-900, Brazil.
Journal of Dentistry (Impact Factor: 2.84). 06/2008; 36(5):309-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.01.018
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the immediate and 6-month resin-dentin micro-bond strength (microTBS) of one-step self-etch systems (Adper Prompt L-Pop [AD] 3M ESPE; Xeno III [XE] Dentsply De Trey; iBond [iB] Heraeus Kulzer) under different application modes.
Dentin oclusal surfaces were exposed by grinding with 600-grit SiC paper. The adhesives were applied according to the manufacturer's directions [MD], or with double application of the adhesive layer [DA] or following the manufacturer's directions plus a hydrophobic resin layer coating [HL]. After applying the adhesive resins, composite crowns were built up incrementally. After 24-h water storage, the specimens were serially sectioned in "x" and "y" directions to obtain bonded sticks of about 0.8mm2 to be tested immediately [IM] or after 6 months of water storage [6M] at a crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min. The data from each adhesive was analyzed by a two-way repeated measures ANOVA (mode of application vs. storage time) and Tukey's test (alpha=0.05).
The adhesives performed differently according to the application mode. The DA and HL either improved the immediate performance of the adhesive or did not differ from the MD. The resin-dentin bond strength values observed after 6 months were higher when a hydrophobic resin coat was used than compared to those values observed under the manufacturer's directions.
The double application of one-step self-etch system can be safety performed however the application of an additional hydrophobic resin layer can improve the immediate resin-dentin bonds and reduce the degradation of resin bonds over time.

1 Follower
 · 
115 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength to dentin (µTBS) of two total-etching adhesives applied with delays of 1–30 s for curing. Fifty extracted molar teeth were used. Occlusal enamel was sectioned to expose flat dentin surface, which was further polished with 600-grit paper for smear layer standardization. The specimens were divided into two groups, G1: Single Bond total-etching adhesive (SB), and G2: Prime & Bond NT total-etching adhesive (PB). Each group was further divided into 5 subgroups according to the delayed light-cure initiation after the adhesive systems application (n=5): Subgroup 1s – 1 s; Subgroup 5s – 5 s; Subgroup 10s – 10 s; Subgroup 20s – 20 s; Subgroup 30s – 30 s. Composite resin cones 5 mm height and 10 mm in diameter were fabricated. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and sectioned to obtain 1×1 mm2 transversal specimens. Specimens were thermocycled and µTBS was measured. Data were submitted to two-way ANOVA (AdhesiveXDelay time) and Tukey׳s test. The level of significance was set at 5%. The results in mean MPa(±SD) for interaction between adhesive and delay time were: PB/1s – 23.82± 2.54a; SB/5s – 19.52± 2.67b; PB/5s – 18.56± 3.06bc; SB/1s – 15.49± 2.69cd; SB/20s – 16.33± 2.55d; SB/10s – 13.88 ±1.67d; PB/10s – 11.04 ±1.28e; PB/30s – 10.89± 1.31e; PB/20s – 10.24± 2.33e; SB/30s – 9.19±1.91e. It was concluded that light-cure initiation timing of total-etching adhesives interferes negatively with µTBS to dentin.
    International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 10/2014; 54:155–158. DOI:10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.06.001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To evaluatethe effect of an additional hydrophobic resin coating (HE) on theresin-dentin microtensile bond strengths (μTBS), nanoleakage (NL), and in situ degree of conversion (DC) of three universal adhesives used in the etch-and-rinse [ER] and the self-etch [SE] modes. Methods: Sixty caries-free extracted third molars were divided into 12 groups according to the combination of the factorsadhesive (All-Bond Universal [ABU]; G-Bond Plus [GBP] and Scotchbond Universal [SBU]),adhesive strategy (ER and SE), and the use ofHE (Heliobond; yes or no). After restorations were constructed, specimens were stored in water (37 °C/24 h) and sectioned into resin-dentin beams (0.8 mm2)to be tested under tension (0.5 mm/min). Selected beams from each tooth were used for DC quantificationand for NL evaluation. Data from each adhesivewere analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). Results:ABU and GBPresulted in higher μTBS in the ER mode. The use of HE increased the μTBS of ABU and GBP only in the SE mode. Lower NL was observed for SBU and ABU in the ER mode + HE, and for GBP in the SE mode + HE. SBU and GBP showed higher DC when used in the ER mode, which was increased with HE application. The DC of ABU was similar in all conditions. Conclusions:the conversionof 1-step SE to 2-step SE may increase the μTBS and DC of current universal adhesives. The reduction in the NL is more dependent on the adhesive composition than on the bonding strategy.
    Journal of dentistry 05/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background/purpose Contemporary one-step self-etch adhesives are certainly the most user-friendly adhesives; however, typically could not compete with the more traditional multi-step adhesives. This in vitro study evaluated the efficacy of two modes of application (double application or placement of a hydrophobic resin coating) for the reduction of microleakage, using three different one-step self-etch adhesives (AdheSE One VivaPen, Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein; Xeno V, Dentsply De Trey, Konstanz, Germany; OptiBond All-In-One, Kerr Italia S.r.l, Scafati, Italy). Materials and methods We prepared Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and gingival margin in dentin on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 108 human molar teeth. Cavities were divided into nine groups according to the combination of adhesives and application modes used (n = 24). For applying adhesives, we followed three types of procedures: (1) according to the manufacturers’ directions; (2) using a double-application method; and (3) with the additional placement of a hydrophobic resin layer after following the manufacturers’ directions. We restored the cavities with a composite resin. After thermocycling (500 cycles at 5°C/55°C) and immersion in 0.5% basic fuchsin, we sectioned the teeth and evaluated them for microleakage using a stereo microscope (20×). Enamel and dentin margins were scored separately, and we analyzed the data using Kruskal–Wallis, Bonferroni-corrected Mann–Whitney U, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results Application of a hydrophobic resin over the cured Xeno V adhesive decreased the amount of microleakage at the enamel margins, compared with the application according to the manufacturer’s instructions (P = 0.005). Both application modes decreased the amount of microleakage at the dentin margins with AdheSE One VivaPen adhesive, compared with application according to the manufacturer’s instructions (P < 0.001). With the OptiBond All-In-One adhesive, no significant difference between application modes was observed. Conclusion Alternative modes of application did not adversely affect the sealing ability of one-step self-etch adhesives. Depending on the type of adhesive, alternative modes of application may contribute to low microleakage values.
    Journal of dental sciences 12/2013; 8(4):425–431. DOI:10.1016/j.jds.2012.09.017

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
136 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014