• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.419-424
• /
• 2011

Objectives: This study was aimed to determine the effects of temporary sealing materials on microtensile bond strength between resin-coated dentin and resin inlay and to compare the bonding effectiveness of delayed dentin sealing and that of immediate dentin sealing. Materials and Methods: The teeth were divided into 4 groups: group 1, specimens were prepared using delayed dentin sealing after temporary sealing with zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE); group 2, specimens were prepared using immediate dentin sealing and ZOE sealing; group 3, specimens were prepared using immediate dentin sealing and Dycal (Dentsply) sealing; group 4, specimens were prepared using immediately sealed, and then temporarily sealed with a resin-based temporary sealing material. After removing the temporary sealing material, we applied resin adhesive and light-cured. Then the resin inlays were applied and bonded to the cavity with a resin-based cement. The microtensile bond strength of the sectioned specimens were measured with a micro-tensile tester (Bisco Inc.). Significance between the specimen groups were tested by means of one-way ANOVA and multiple Duncan's test. Results: Group 1 showed the lowest bond strength, and group 4 showed the highest bond strength (p < 0.01). When temporary sealing was performed with ZOE, immediate dentin sealing showed a higher bonding strength than delayed dentin sealing (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Based on these results, immediate dentin sealing is more recommended than delayed dentin sealing in bonding a resin inlay to dentin. Also, resin-based temporary sealing materials have shown the best result.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.148-156
• /
• 2008

Statement of problems: Self-etch adhesives exhibit some clinical benefits such as ease of manipulation and reduced technique-sensitivity. Nevertheless, some concern remains regarding the bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives to enamel, in particular when so-called 'mild' self-etch adhesives are employed. This study compared the microtensile bond strengths to ground enamel of the two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) to the three-step etch-and- rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (3M ESPE) and the one-step self-etch adhesive iBond (Heraeus Kulzer). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of a preceding phosphoric acid conditioning step on the bonding effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive to ground enamel. Material and methods: The two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond non-etch group, Clearfil SE Bond etch group with prior 35% phosphoric acid etching, and the one-step self-etch adhesive iBond group were used as experimental groups. The three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose was used as a control group. The facial surfaces of bovine incisors were divided in four equal parts cruciformly, and randomly distributed into each group. The facial surface of each incisor was ground with 800-grit silicon carbide paper. Each adhesive group was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions to ground enamel, after which the surface was built up using Light-Core (Bisco). After storage in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 1 week, the restored teeth were sectioned into enamel beams approximately 0.8*0.8mm in cross section using a low speed precision diamond saw (TOPMET Metsaw-LS). After storage in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 1 month, 3 months, microtensile bond strength evaluations were performed using microspecimens. The microtensile bond strength (MPa) was derived by dividing the imposed force (N) at time of fracture by the bond area ($mm^2$). The mode of failure at the interface was determined with a microscope (Microscope-B nocular, Nikon). The data of microtensile bond strength were statistically analyzed using a one-way ANOVA, followed by Least Significant Difference Post Hoc Test at a significance level of 5%. Results: The mean microtensile bond strength after 1 month of storage showed no statistically significant difference between all adhesive groups (P>0.05). After 3 months of storage, adhesion to ground enamel of iBond was not significantly different from Clearfil SE Bond etch (P>>0.05), while Clearfil SE Bond non-etch and Scotchbond Multi-Purpose demonstrated significantly lower bond strengths (P<0.05), with no significant differences between the two adhesives. Conclusion: In this study the microtensile bond strength to ground enamel of two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond was not significantly different from three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, and prior etching with 35% phosphoric acid significantly increased the bonding effectiveness of Clearfil SE Bond to enamel at 3 months.