Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Bond strength of one-step self-etch adhesives and their predecessors to ground versus unground enamel

View through CrossRef
ABSTRACTObjectives: The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of several self-etch adhesives to their two-step predecessors to ground and unground enamel.Methods: Seventy-five extracted, non-carious human third molar teeth were selected for this study. The buccal surfaces of each tooth were mechanically ground to obtain flat enamel surfaces (ground enamel), while the lingual surfaces were left intact (unground enamel). The teeth were randomly divided into five groups according to the adhesive systems (n=15): one-step self-etch adhesive - Clearfil S3 Bond, its two-step predecessor - Clearfil SE Bond, one-step self-etch adhesive - AdheSE One, and its two-step predecessor - AdheSE, and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive - Adper Single Bond 2(control). After application of the adhesives to the buccal and lingual enamel surfaces of each tooth, a cylindrical capsule filled with a hybrid composite resin (TPH) was seated against the surfaces. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours, followed by thermocycling (5°C-55°C/500 cycles). They were subjected to shear bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/minute. The data were compared using a two-way ANOVA, followed by Bonferroni test at P<.05Results: All adhesives exhibited statistically similar bond strengths to ground and unground enamel except for the etch-and-rinse adhesive that showed significantly higher bond strengths than the self-etch adhesives (P<.05). No significant differences in bond strength values were observed between ground and unground enamel for any of the adhesives tested (P=.17).Conclusions:Similar bond strengths to ground and unground enamel were achieved with one-step self-etch adhesives and their predecessors. Enamel preparation did not influence the bonding performance of the adhesives tested. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:280-286)
Title: Bond strength of one-step self-etch adhesives and their predecessors to ground versus unground enamel
Description:
ABSTRACTObjectives: The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of several self-etch adhesives to their two-step predecessors to ground and unground enamel.
Methods: Seventy-five extracted, non-carious human third molar teeth were selected for this study.
The buccal surfaces of each tooth were mechanically ground to obtain flat enamel surfaces (ground enamel), while the lingual surfaces were left intact (unground enamel).
The teeth were randomly divided into five groups according to the adhesive systems (n=15): one-step self-etch adhesive - Clearfil S3 Bond, its two-step predecessor - Clearfil SE Bond, one-step self-etch adhesive - AdheSE One, and its two-step predecessor - AdheSE, and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive - Adper Single Bond 2(control).
After application of the adhesives to the buccal and lingual enamel surfaces of each tooth, a cylindrical capsule filled with a hybrid composite resin (TPH) was seated against the surfaces.
The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours, followed by thermocycling (5°C-55°C/500 cycles).
They were subjected to shear bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.
0 mm/minute.
The data were compared using a two-way ANOVA, followed by Bonferroni test at P<.
05Results: All adhesives exhibited statistically similar bond strengths to ground and unground enamel except for the etch-and-rinse adhesive that showed significantly higher bond strengths than the self-etch adhesives (P<.
05).
No significant differences in bond strength values were observed between ground and unground enamel for any of the adhesives tested (P=.
17).
Conclusions:Similar bond strengths to ground and unground enamel were achieved with one-step self-etch adhesives and their predecessors.
Enamel preparation did not influence the bonding performance of the adhesives tested.
(Eur J Dent 2012;6:280-286).

Related Results

AnIn VitroEvaluation of Leakage of Two Etch and Rinse and Two Self-Etch Adhesives after Thermocycling
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 ...
Self etch adhesives - An update
Self etch adhesives - An update
Self etch adhesives are one of the most recent advancements the field of dentistry has seen recently. Adhesive frameworks today are either an "etch and rinse or total etch" or "sel...
Impact of Self-Etch Adhesives Increased Application Time on Dental Bond Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Impact of Self-Etch Adhesives Increased Application Time on Dental Bond Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, it was intended to determine whether increasing the application time of self-etch adhesives and universal adhesives could increase the ...
Posteruptive Loss of Enamel Proteins Concurs with Gain in Enamel Hardness
Posteruptive Loss of Enamel Proteins Concurs with Gain in Enamel Hardness
ABSTRACT Tooth enamel maturation requires the removal of proteins from the mineralizing enamel matrix to allow for crystallite growth until full hardness is reached...

Back to Top