• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.263-268
• /
• 2006

Recently, self-etching adhesive system has been introduced to simplify the clinical bonding proce- dures. It is less acidic compared to the phosphoric acid, thus there is doubt whether this system has enough bond strength to enamel. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of additional etching on the adhesion of resin composite to enamel. Ninety extracted bovine permanent anterior teeth were used. The labial surfaces of the crown were ground with 600-grit abrasive paper under wet condition. The teeth were randomly divided into six groups of 15 teeth each. Clearfil SE $Bond^{\circledR},\;Adper^{TM}$ Prompt L-Pop and Tyrian $SPE^{TM}$ were used as self-etching primers. Each self-etching primers were applied in both enamel specimens with and without additional etching. For additional etching groups, enamel surface was pretreated with 32% phosphoric acid (UNI-ETCH, Bisco, Inc., Schaumburg, IL. USA). Hybrid resin composite Clearfil AP-X, (Kuraray Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan) was packed into the mold and light-cured for 40 seconds. Twenty-four hours after storage, the specimens were tested in shear bond strength. The data for each group were subjected to independent t - test at p < 0.01 to make comparisons among the groups. In Clearfil SE $Bond^{\circledR}$, shear bond strength of additional etching group was higher than no additional etching group (p < 0.01). In $Adper^{TM}$ Prompt L-Pop and Tyrian SPE, there were no significant difference between additional etching and non-etching groups (p > 0.01). In conclusion, self-etching adhesive system with weak acid seems to have higher bond strength to enamel with additional etching, while self-etching adhesive system with strong acid seems not.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.350-355
• /
• 2009

Bond strength depends on characteristics of bonding surface and restorative technique. The majority of studies dealing with dentin bond strength were carried out on flat bonding surface, therefore, difference of bond strength between axial wall and pulpal wall is not clear yet. This study evaluated bonding difference between cavity walls in class I composite resin restoration with different filling techniques. Twenty extracted caries-free human third molars were used. Cavities were prepared in 6 ${\times}$4 ${\times}$3 mm box-type and divided into four groups according to filling technique and bonding surface: Group I; bulk filling - pulpal wall, Group II; bulk filling - axial wall, Group III; incremental filling - pulpal wall, Group IV; incremental filling - axial wall. Cavities were filled with Filtek $Z250^{(R)}$(3M/ESPE., USA) and Clearfill SE $bond^{(R)}$(Kuraray, Japan). After 24 hour-storage in $37^{\circ}C$water, the resin bonded teeth were sectioned bucco-lingualy at the center of cavity. Specimens were vertically sectioned into 1.0 ${\times}$1.0 mm thick serial sticks perpendicular to the bond surface using a low-speed diamond saw (Accutom 50, Struers, Copenhagen, Denmark) under water cooling. The trimmed specimens were then attached to the testing device and in turn, was placed in a universal testing machine (EZ test, Shimadzu Co., Kyoto, Japan) for micro-tensile testing at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min. The results obtained were statistically analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and t-test at a significance level of 95%. The results were as follows: 1. There was no significant difference between bulk filling and incremental filling. 2. There was no significant difference between pulpal wall and axial wall, either. Within the limit of this study, it was concluded that microtensile bond strength was not affected by the filling technique and the site of cavity walls.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.28-36
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of exponential curing method with conventional curing and soft start curing method on polymerization shrinkage of composite resins. Three brands of composite resins (Synergy Duo Shade, Z250, Filtek Supreme) and three brands of light curing units (Spectrum 800, Elipar Highlight, Elipar Trilight) were used. 40 seconds curing time was given. The shrinkage was measured using linometer for 90 seconds. The effect of time on polymerization shrinkage was analysed by one-way ANOVA and the effect of curing modes and materials on polymerization shrinkage at the time of 90s were analysed by two-way ANOVA. The shrinkage ratios at the time of 20s to 90s were taken and analysed the same way. The results were as follows : 1. All the groups except Supreme shrank almost within 20s Supreme cured by soft start and exponential curing had no further shrinkage after 30s (p < 0.05). 2. Statistical analysis revealed that polymerization shrinkage varied among materials (p = 0.000) and curing modes (p = 0.003). There was no significant interaction between material and curing mode. 3. The groups cured by exponential curing showed the statistically lower polymerization shrinkage at 90s than the groups cured by conventional curing and soft start curing (p < 0.05). 4. The initial shrinkage ratios of soft start and exponential curing were statistically lower than conventional curing (p < 0.05). From this study, the use of low initial light intensities may reduce the polymerization rate and, as a result, reduce the stress of polymerization shrinkage.