• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.88-95
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if pre-treatment with desensitizers have a negative effect on microtensile bond strength before cementing a restoration using recently introduced self-adhesive resin cement to dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-five human molars' occlusal surfaces were ground to expose dentin; and were randomly grouped as (n=5); 1) Gluma-(Glutaraldehyde/HEMA) 2) Aqua-Prep F-(Fluoride), 3) Bisblock-(Oxalate), 4) Cervitec Plus-(Clorhexidine), 5) Smart protect-(Triclosan), 6) Nd:YAG laser, 7) No treatment (control). After applying the selected agent, RelyX U200 self-adhesive resin cement was used to bond composite resin blocks to dentin. All groups were subjected to thermocycling for 1000 cycles between $5-55^{\circ}C$. Each bonded specimen was sectioned to microbars ($6mm{\times}1mm{\times}1mm$) (n=20). Specimens were submitted to microtensile bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Levene's test, Kruskal-Wallis One-way Analysis of Variance, and Conover's nonparametric statistical analysis were used (P<.05). RESULTS. Gluma, Smart Protect and Nd:YAG laser treatments showed comparable microtensile bond strengths compared with the control group (P>.05). The microtensile bond strengths of Aqua-Prep F, and Cervitec Plus were similar to each other but significantly lower than the control group (P<.05). Bisblock showed the lowest microtensile bond strength among all groups (P<.001). Most groups showed adhesive failure. CONCLUSION. Within the limitation of this study, it is not recommended to use Aqua-prep F, Cervitec Plus and Bisblock on dentin when used with a self-adhesive resin cement due to the decrease they cause in bond strength. Beside, pre-treatment of dentin with Gluma, Smart protect, and Nd:YAG laser do not have a negative effect.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.153-161
• /
• 2004

This study investigated that the effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strength(${\mu}TBS$). Human molars were sectioned to expose the superficial dentin surfaces. Samples were divided into two groups according to type of adhesives-Single Bond (S) and One-Step (0)], and again subdivided into five groups by different dentin surface treatment-dry for 15s (D), blot dry (BD) or dry for 15s, and rewet with different rewetting agents [distilled water (DW), Gluma Desensitizer (GD) and Aqua-Prep (AP)] for 30s. After application of adhesive, composite resin was built up on the bonding surface. Each tooth was sectioned to obtain stick with $1\textrm{mm}^2$ cross sectional area and the ${\mu}TBS$ was determined by EZ test. In the S group, the mean ${\mu}TBS$ of GD, AP, and BD group was significantly higher than that of DW and D group (p < 0.05), In the O group, the mean, ${\mu}TBS$ of AP, GD, BD and DW group was significantly higher than that of D group (p < 0.05). The data suggested that Gluma Desensitizer and Aqua-Prep could be successfully used as rewetting agents, and Distilled water could be acceptable in aceton based adhesive system only.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.205-211
• /
• 2004

This study evaluated the microleakage and interfacial gap between enamel and composite resin under the dry and wet condition of the enamel surface. V shaped class 5 cavities were prepared on the occlusal portion of extracted human molars. Samples were divided into three groups：D group (air dry for 10-15s), BD group (blot dry with moist cotton pellet), and DR group (air dry for 10-15s and rewet with Aqua-Prep F for 20s), Cavities were filled using Aelitefil composite resin after applied One-Step. Microleakage was tested by 2% methylene blue dye solution and the data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test. Also Enamel-resin interface was observed under SEM. Group BD showed statistically lower microleakage than group D (p < 0.05). but there was no statistically significant difference between group BD and DR (p > 0.05). At the enamel-resin interface, group D showed the gap of $2{\;}{\mu}m$ thickness, but group BD and DR showed close adaptation. In conclusion, the use of blot dry and rewetting agent (Aqua-Prep F) resulted in decreased microleakage and improved adhesion between enamel and resin when using One-Step.

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.568-568
• /
• 2003

I. Objectives This study investigated the effect of rewetting agent on dentinal microtensile bond strengths(${\mu}TBS$), using one bottle adhesives. II. Materials and Methods Non caries human molars were sectioned to exposed the superficial dentin surfaces, etched 15 seconds using 32% phosphoric acid and 10 seconds rinsed. Samples were randomly divided into two groups according to adhesives (Single Bond, One-Step) used. Each group were subdivided into five groups by different dentin surface treatment：15 second dry(D), blot dry(BD) or 15 second dry and rewetted with distrilled water(DW), Gluma Desensitizer(GD) and Aqua-Prep(AP) during 30 second, respectively.(omitted)

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.11-22
• /
• 2003

This study compared the dentin adhesion to composite resin according to air-dry, blot dry, application of rewetting agent on air-dry or blot dry dentin surface by microleakag test and SEM observation. For microleakage test, class V cavity preparations with dentinal margins were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 extracted human molars. For SEM observation, occlusal dentin of 20 extracted human molars were exposed. After etched the dentin, prepared teeth were randomly divided into four groups; D group: air dry for 10-15 sec., B group: blot dry with moist cotton pellet, D-R group: air dry and rewet with Aqua-Prep F for 20 sec., B-R group: blot dry and rewet with Aqua-Prep F for 20 sec. Treated cavities and surfaces were filled or constructed using One-Step adhesives and Aelitefil composite resins. Specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours. For microleakage test, the specimens were thermocycled and soaked into 2% methylene blue. The specimens were sectioned longitudinally and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kuskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests. For SEM observation, the specimens were bisectioned mesiodiatally. After decalcified and deproteinized, specimens were observed under SEM. The results of this study were as follows; 1. The microleakges on dentinal margin were the highest in D group compared with B group, D-R group, and B-R group(p<0.05). But there was no significant difference between B group, D-R group and B-R group. 2. D group showed gap and a few resin tags between dentin and composite resin. 3 B group, D-R group, and B-R groups showed close adaptation between dentin and composite resin. It showed that resin rags in B group were numerous and long, in D-R group were few and short, in B-R group were numerous and short or long. 4. Adhesive layer showed in D-R group ($10{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$) and B-R group ($3{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$) In conclusion, use of rewetting agent to dry dentin was efficient to dentin adhesion, also it did not provide reverse effect on blot dry dentin.