• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.445-458
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strength of a new Single step system with different curing mode composites, and to evaluate the effect of the intermediate resins which have different hydrophilicity on bonding ability by means of the micro shear bond testing and TEM examination for the adhesive interface. The adhesive used in this study was an experimental single step system (Bisco Inc., Schaumburg IL). Experimental groups were produced by using six kinds of intermediate resin having different hydrophilicity that was hydrophilic, hydrophobic and most hydrophobic resin and as filled or not after applying adhesive. Each experimental group was further divided into two subgroups whether the adhesive was light cured or not. Dual cured composite (Bis Core, Bisco Ltd., Schaumburg, IL) was placed on the adhesive layer as light cure or self cure mode. The results or bond strength were statistically analyzed using one way ANOVA and multiple comparisons are made using Tukey's test at ${\alpha}\;<\;0.05$ level. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. The application of intermediate resin did not increase the bond strength for light cured composite. 2. The bond strength of an experimental adhesive with self cured composite was significantly increased by the application of intermediate resin layer. 3. The bond strength of adhesive was irrespective of the cure or not of itself before intermediate resin layer applied. 4. As applied hydrophilic resin layer was, the initial bond strength was higher than both hydrophobic and most hydrophobic one used but there was no significance. Using a single step adhesive with dual/self cured composite, the incompatibility between both of them should be solved by the application of intermediate hydrophobic resin to reduce the adhesive permeability. However, Single step adhesive can be used in the light cured composite restoration without any decrease of the initial bond strength.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.169-179
• /
• 2007

This study was to compare the microshear bond strength $({\mu}SBS)$ of light- and chemically cured composites to enamel coupled with four 2-step self-etch adhesives and also to evaluate the incompatibility between 2-step self-etch adhesives and chemically cured composite resin. Crown segments of extracted human molars were cut mesiodistally, and a 1 mm thickness of specimen was made. They were assigned to four groups by adhesives used: SE group (Clearfil SE Bond) AdheSE group (AdheSE), Tyrian group (Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus), and Contax group (Contax) Each adhesive was applied to a cut enamel surface as per the manufacturer's instruction. Light-cured (Filtek Z250) or chemically cured composite (Luxacore Smartmix Dual) was bonded to the enamel of each specimen using a Tygon tube. After storage in distilled water for 24 hours, the bonded specimens were subjected to ${\mu}SBS$ testing with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mean ${\mu}SBS$ (n=20 for each group) was statistically compared using two-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD, and t test at 95% level. Also the interface of enamel and composite was evaluated under FE-SEM. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. The ${\mu}SBS$ of the SE Bond group to the enamel was significantly higher than that of the AdheSE group, the Tyrian group, and the Contax group in both the light-cured and the chemically cured composite resin (p < 0.05). 2. There was not a significant difference among the hdheSE group, the Tyrian group, and the Contax group in both the light-cured and the chemically cured composite resin. 3. The ${\mu}SBS$ of the light-cured composite resin was significantly higher than that of the chemically cured composite resin when same adhesive was applied to the enamel (p < 0.05). 4. The interface of enamel and all 2-step self-etch adhesives showed close adaptation, and so the incompatibility of the chemically cured composite resin did not show.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2007

This study compared the microshear bond strength (${\mu}SBS$) of light-cured and dual-cured composites to enamel bonded with three self-etching adhesives. Crown segments of extracted human molars were cut mesiodistally, and 1 mm thickness of specimen was made. They were assigned to three groups by used adhesives: Xeno group (Xeno III), Adper group (Adper Prompt L-Pop), and AQ group (AQ Bond). Each adhesive was applied to cut enamel surface as per manufacturer's instruction. Light-cured (Filtek Z 250) or dual-cured composite (Luxacore) was bonded to enamel of each specimen using Tygon tube. After storage in distilled water for 24 hours, the bonded specimens were subjected to ${\mu}SBS$ testing with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mean ${\mu}SBS$ (n = 20 for each group) was statistically compared using two-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD, and t test at the 0.05 probability level, The results of this study were as follows ; 1. The ${\mu}SBS$ of light-cured composite was significantly higher than that of dual-cured composite when same adhesive was applied to enamel. 2. For Z 250, the ${\mu}SBS$ of AQ group ($9.95{\pm}2.51 MPa$) to enamel was significantly higher than that of Adper soup ($6.74{\pm}1.80 MPa$), but not significantly different with Xeno group ($7.73{\pm}2.01 MPa$). 3. For Luxacore, the ${\mu}SBS$ of Xeno group ($5.19{\pm}1.32\;MPa$) to enamel was significantly higher than that of Adper group ($3.41{\pm}1.19\;MPa$), but not significantly different with AQ group ($4.50{\pm}0.96\;MPa$).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.426-436
• /
• 2007

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of an additional application of bonding resin on the bond strength of resin luting cements in both the light-cure (LC) and self-cure (SC) modes by means of the ${\mu}TBS$ tests. Three combinations of One-Step Plus with Choice, Single Bond with Rely X ARC, and One-Up Bond F with Bistite II were used. D/E resin and Pre-Bond resin were used for the additional application. Twelve experimental groups were made. Three mandibular $3^{rd}$ molars were used in each group. Indirect composite blocks were cemented on the tooth surface. $1\;{\times}\;1\;mm^2$ dentin-composite beam for ${\mu}TBS$ testing were made and tested. When total-etching dentin adhesives were used, an additional application of the bonding resin increased the bond strength (P < 0.05). However, this additional application didn't influence the bond strength of self-etching dentin adhesives (P > 0.05). In conclusion, the results suggest that an additional application of the bonding resin increases bond strength and enhances quality of bonding when using total-etching dentin adhesives.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.34 no.5
• /
• pp.397-405
• /
• 2009

This study compared the effect of an activator, intermediate bonding resin and low-viscosity flowable resin on the microtensile bond strength of a self-curing composite resin used with two-step total etching adhesives. Twenty extracted permanent molars were used. The teeth were assigned randomly to nine groups (n=10) according to the adhesive system and application of additional methods (activator, intermediate adhesive, flowable resin). The bonding agents and additional applications of each group were applied to the dentin surfaces. Self-curing composite resin buildups were made for each tooth to form a core, 5mm in height. The restored teeth were then stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24h before sectioning. The microtensile bond strength of all specimens was examined. The data was analyzed statistically by one-way ANOVA and a Scheffe's test. The application of an intermediate bonding resin (Optibond FL adhesive) and low-viscosity flowable resin (Tetric N-flow) produced higher bond strength than that with the activator in all groups. Regardless of the method selected, Optibond solo plus produced the lowest ${\mu}TBS$ to dentin. The failure modes of the tested dentin bonding agents were mostly adhesive failure but there were some cases showed cohesive failure in the resin.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.5
• /
• pp.419-427
• /
• 2008

This study analyzed the influence of dental adhesive/primer on the bond strength between indirect resin composite and the resin cement. Seventy disc specimens of indirect resin composite (Tescera Dentin, Bisco) were fabricated. And bonding area of all specimens were sandblasted and silane treated for one minute. The resin cements were used with or without application of adhesive/primer to bonding area of indirect resin restoration, Variolink-II (Ivoclar-Vivadent) : Exite DSC, Panavia-F (Kuraray) : ED-Primer, RelyX Unicorn (3M ESPE) Single- Bond, Duolink (Risco) : One-step, Mulitlink (Ivoclar-Vivadent) : Multilinh Primer. Shear bond strength was measured by Instron universal testing machine. Adhesive application improved shear bond strength (p<0.05) But Variolink II and Panavia-F showed no statistically significant difference according to the adhesive application. With the above results, when resin inlay is luted by resin cement it seems that application of dental adhesive/primer is necessary in order to improve the bond strength.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.341-346
• /
• 2020

Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), a self-curing resin mainly used in removable orthodontic appliances, is an acrylic resin mainly used in the field of modern dentistry. As an advantage, it has been used for a long time as a material for orthodontic devices in dentistry due to its color and volume, tissue affinity, and stability. The production of PMMA can be divided into self-polymerization method and thermal polymerization method according to activation method. Self-curing resins have long been used as orthodontic devices. The resin injection method is largely divided into a sprinkle-on method and a mixing method. In this study, we intend to test the mechanical properties according to the resin injection method of the orthodontic device, such as strength, modulus of elasticity, and surface roughness. There was no significant difference in strength as a result of three-point bending strength test on rectangular specimens (1.4 × 3.0 × 19.0 mm) of orthodontic PMMA. There was also no significant difference in hardness. There was no significant difference in surface roughness. It was confirmed that the orthodontic PMMA had no significant difference in mechanical properties according to the resin injection method of the orthodontic device.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.169-176
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of thickness, filling methods and curing methods on the polymerization of dual cured core materials by means of microhardness test. Two dual cured core materials, MultiCore Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and Bis-Core (Bisco Inc., Schaumburg, IL, USA) were used in this study. 2 mm (bulky filled), 4 mm (bulky filled), 6 mm (bulky and incrementally filled) and 8 mm (bulky and incrementally filled)-thickness specimens were prepared with light cure or self cure mode. After storage at $37{\circ}C$ for 24 hours, the Knoop hardness values (KHN) of top and bottom surfaces were measured and the microhardness ratio of top and bottom surfaces was calculated. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe multiple comparison test, with ${\alpha}$= 0.05. The effect of thickness on the polymerization of dual cured composites showed material specific results. In 2, 4 and 6 mm groups, the KHN of two materials were not affected by thickness. However, in 8 mm group of MultiCore Flow, the KHN of the bottom surface was lower than those of other groups (p < 0.05). The effect of filling methods on the polymerization of dual cured composites was different by their thickness or materials. In 6 mm thickness, there was no significant difference between bulk and incremental filling groups. In 8 mm thickness, Bis-Core showed no significant difference between groups. However, in MultiCore Flow, the microhardness ratio of bulk filling group was lower than that of incremental filling group (p < 0.05). The effect of curing methods on the polymerization of dual cured composites showed material specific results. In Bis-Core, the KHN of dual cured group were higher than those of self cured group at both surfaces (p < 0.05). However, in MultiCore Flow, the results were not similar at both surfaces. At the top surface, dual cured group showed higher KHN than that of self cured group (p < 0.05). However, in the bottom surface, dual cured group showed lower value than that of self cured group (p < 0.05).

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2008.05a
• /
• pp.169-176
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of thickness, filling methods and curing methods on the polymerization of dual cured core materials by means of microhardness test. Two dual cured core materials, MultiCore Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and Bis-Core (Bisco Inc., Schaumburg, IL, USA) were used in this study. 2 mm (bulky filled), 4 mm (bulky filled), 6 mm (bulky and incrementally filled) and 8 mm (bulky and incrementally filled)-thickness specimens were prepared with light cure or self cure mode. After storage at $37^{\circ}C$ for 24 hours, the Knoop hardness values (KHN) of top and bottom surfaces were measured and the microhardness ratio of top and bottom surfaces was calculated. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe multiple comparison test, with ${\alpha}=0.05$. The effect of thickness on the polymerization of dual cured composites showed material specific results. In 2, 4 and 6 mm groups, the KHN of two materials were not affected by thickness. However, in 8 mm group of MultiCore Flow, the KHN of the bottom surface was lower than those of other groups (p < 0.05). The effect of filling methods on the polymerization of dual cured composites was different by their thickness or materials. In 6 mm thickness, there was no significant difference between bulk and incremental filling groups. In 8 mm thickness, Bis-Core showed no significant difference between groups. However, in MultiCore Flow, the microhardness ratio of bulk filling group was lower than that of incremental filling group (p < 0.05). The effect of curing methods on the polymerization of dual cured composites showed material specific results. In Bis-Core, the KHN of dual cured group were higher than those of self cured group at both surfaces (p < 0.05). However, in MultiCore Flow, the results were not similar at both surfaces. At the top surface, dual cured group showed higher KHN than that of self cured group (p < 0.05). However, in the bottom surface, dual cured group showed lower value than that of self cured group (p < 0.05).

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.5
• /
• pp.511-519
• /
• 2008

Statement of problem: An incompatibility between the initiator systems of self-curing composite resins and light-curing adhesives was supposed recently. Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of activators for self/dual bonding on dentin shear bonding strengths. Material and methods: Fifty human molars were divided into 5 groups. A flat dentin surface was created for each tooth. A self-curing composite resin (Luxacore) was bonded with the following adhesives (n = 10); One-Step, Prime&Bond NT, AdheSE, Prime&Bond NT and AdheSE were also used in combination with activators. Shear bond strengths were measured after 24 hours of water storage. The specimens were loaded in shear in the Instron until failure at a 1 mm/min crosshead speed. Data were compared using one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test (${\alpha}$= 0.05). Results: The dentin adhesive systems in order of decreasing median bond strength were One-Step > Prime&Bond NT with activator, AdheSE with activator > Prime&Bond NT, AdheSE. Among adhesives, One-Step had the highest bond strength. Prime&Bond NT with activator had higher bond strengths than Prime&Bond NT that was used alone, and so was AdheSE. Conclusion: Shear bond strengths were increased in Prime&Bond NT and AdheSE when these were used with activators comparing used without activators. But using activators was not effective clinically comparing One-Step.