• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.36-43
• /
• 2004

The purpose of this study was to compare the microhardness and the fluoride content of enamel and dentin around fluoride- or non fluoride-containing restorations. Forty extracted human teeth were used and prepared cervical cavities on proximal surface. Experimental teeth were divided into five groups . Group 1 : Prime & Bond NT and Z100, Group 2 Prime & Bond NT and F2000, Group 3 : Scotchbond Multi-purpose and Z100, Group 4 : Scothcbond Multi-purpose and F2000, Group 5 : Fuji II LC. The cavities were filled with dentin adhesives and restorative materials. After each tooth was bisected, one half was tested microharaness and the other half was analyzed the fluoride at the enamel and dentin by an EPMA-WDX device. The results were as follows; 1. There was no statistical difference among the microhardness of enamel surface in all group. 2. The microhardness at dentin of $100{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$ point in Group 2 and $20{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$ point in Grocup 4 was lower than that of normal dentin (p>0.05). 3. There was no statistical difference among the fluoride content of enamel surface in all group. 4. The fluoride content at the dentin of $30{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$ point in Group 2 and 5 were higher than those at $100{\;}\mu\textrm{m}{\;}and{\;}200{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$ point in Group 2 and normal dentin (p<0.05). 5. At the dentin of $30{\;}\mu\textrm{m}$ point, Group 2 showed higher fluoride content than Group 1 and 3, and Group 5 showed higher fluoride content than other groups.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.44 no.2
• /
• pp.13.1-13.9
• /
• 2019

Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of dentin pretreatment with silver nanoparticles (SNPs) and chlorhexidine (CHX) on the microshear bond strength (${\mu}SBS$) durability of different adhesives to dentin. Materials and Methods: Occlusal surfaces of 120 human molars were ground to expose flat dentin surfaces. The specimens were randomly assigned to six groups (n = 20). Three groups (A, B, and C) were bonded with Adper Single Bond 2 (SB) and the other groups (D, E, and F) were bonded with Clearfil SE Bond (SEB). Dentin was pretreated with CHX in groups B and E, and with SNPs in groups C and F. The specimens were restored with Z250 composite. Half of the bonded surfaces in each group underwent ${\mu}SBS$ testing after 24 hours and the other half was tested after 6 months of water storage. Results: SNP application was associated with a higher ${\mu}SBS$ than was observed in the CHX and control groups for SEB after 24 hours (p < 0.05). A significantly lower ${\mu}SBS$ was observed when no dentin pretreatment was applied compared to dentin pretreatment with CHX and SNPs for SB after 24 hours (p < 0.05). The ${\mu}SBS$ values of the 6-month specimens were significantly lower than those obtained from the 24-hour specimens for all groups (p < 0.05). This decrease was much more pronounced when both adhesives were used without any dentin pretreatment (p < 0.05). Conclusions: SNPs and CHX reduced the degradation of resin-dentin bonds over a 6-month period for both adhesive systems.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.4
• /
• pp.479-484
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of additional acid etching and curing mechanism (light-curing or self-curing) of a composite resin on the dentin bond strength and compatibility of one-step self-etching adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixteen human permanent molars were randomly divided into eight groups according to the adhesives used (All-Bond Universal: ABU, Clearfil S3 Bond: CS3), additional acid etching (additional acid etching performed: EO, no additional acid etching performed: EX), and composite resins (Filtek Z-250: Z250, Clearfil FII New Bond: CFNB). Group 1: ABU-EO-Z250, Group 2: ABU-EO-CFNB, Group 3: ABU-EX-Z250, Group 4: ABU-EX-CFNB, Group 5: CS3-EO-Z250, Group 6: CS3-EO-CFNB, Group 7: CS3-EX-Z250, Group 8: CS3-EX-CFNB. After bonding procedures, composite resins were built up on dentin surfaces. After 24-hour water storage, the teeth were sectioned to make 10 specimens for each group. The microtensile bond strength test was performed using a microtensile testing machine. The failure mode of the fractured specimens was examined by means of an optical microscope at ${\times}20$ magnification. The data was analyzed using a one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's post-hoc test (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. Additional etching groups showed significantly higher values than the no additional etching group when using All-Bond Universal. The light-cured composite resin groups showed significantly higher values than the self-cured composite resin groups in the Clearfil S3 Bond. CONCLUSION. The additional acid etching is beneficial for the dentin bond strength when using low acidic one-step self-etch adhesives, and low acidic one-step self-etch adhesives are compatible with self-cured composite resin. The acidity of the one-step self-etch adhesives is an influencing factor in terms of the dentin bonding strength and incompatibility with a self-cured composite resin.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.377-387
• /
• 2006

The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of multiple adhesive coatings on the thickness of hybrid and adhesive layer and shear bond strength(SBS) of self-etch adhesives and self-etch primer adhesives. The buccal or lingual crown dentin of extracted human molars was used. Self-etch adhesives or self-etch primer adhesives were applied 1, 2 and 3 times on the dentin before light curing. In another group adhesives were reapplied after light curing first layer. Treated surfaces were prepared to measure the thickness of hybrid and adhesive layer with SEM, and shear bond strength to dentin using an Instron machine. The following results were obtained : 1. The adhesive layers increased with the number of coatings(p<0.05) with all adhesives. Adpor Prompt L-Pop and Xeno III were significantly thinner than self-etch primer adhesives (p<0.05). 2. The thickness of hybrid layers increased with the number of coatings (p<0.05). 3. The shear bonding strength of Unifil Bond and Clearfill SE Bond were higher than Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus and Adpor Prompt L-Pop (p<0.05), and similar with Xeno III. 4. The shear bond strength increased significantly with the number of coatings in Adpor Prompt L-Pop(p<0.05), but decreased at 3 times in AdheSE Bond(p>0.05). 5. In Adpor Prompt L-Pop and Xeno III, the shear bond strength decreased when adhesives were reapplied after curing the first adhesive layer.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.383-397
• /
• 1992

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of artificial saliva contamination on bonding of several dentin adhesives to dentin. Sixty - three human molar teeth extracted within a month were used. Each tooth was sectioned longitudinally in a buccolingual direction to obtain 126 specimens. These specimens were randomly divided into three groups and were treated by Scotchbond 2, Gluma and All bond. Each group was subdivided into three subgroups; normal group not contaminated with artificial saliva, contaminated with artificial saliva and dried group, and contaminated with artificial saliva and washed and dried group. Enamel/dentin bonding agent(Dental Adhesive of Scotchbond 2) was applied and light cured on the treated dentin surfaces. Thereafter P - 50 were cured on them, and specimens were stored in $37^{\circ}C$ artificial saliva for 24 hours before measuring shear bond strength. Shear bond strengths were determined using an universal testing machine with cross head speed 1mm/min and SEM examinations were conducted to evaluate the resin - dentin interface and degree of penetrating resin string into the dentinal tubules. The following results were obtained. 1. Normal groups not contaminated with artificial saliva showed greater shear bond strength than any other group contaminated with artificial saliva(P<0.01). 2. The shear bond strengths showed no significant difference between washed groups with distilled water and not washed groups after contamination with artificial saliva(P>0.05). 3. In normal groups, the shear bond strength of A group was significantly greater than in any other group(P<0.01). 4. In Sand G groups, fractures after shear bond strength tests occured adhesively on resintooth interface in all specimens. But in A groups, fracture of the normal group occured cohesively in dentin and fracture of the contaminated groups occured adhesively and cohesively. 5. On SEM examination, the number of resin strings penetrated into dentinal tubules were the greatest in normal groups, followed by, in descending order, washed groups and not washed groups after contamination with artificial saliva.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.319-326
• /
• 2005

This study compared the microtensile bond strength $({\mu}TBS)$ of single step adhesives to different dentin depths. Superficial or deep dentin was exposed in 30 molar teeth by sectioning immediately under the DEJ or 1.5mm area from central pit, respectively. After polishing with 600-grit SiC paper, the dentin surfaces were assigned to three groups: AQ group-AQ Bond, L-Pop group-Adper Prompt L-Pop, Xeno group-Xeno III. The bonded specimens were sectioned into sticks and subjected to ${\mu}TBS$ testing with a crosshead speed of 1mm/minute. The results of this study were as follows; The ${\mu}TBS$ to superficial dentin was higher than that to deep dentin in all group. The ${\mu}TBS$ of Xeno group was significantly higher than that of L-Pop group and AQ group in both superficial and deep dentin (p<0.05).

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2002.11a
• /
• pp.671-671
• /
• 2002

No Abstract, See Full Text

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.420-429
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to compare the micro ensile bond strength to bovine dentin of several adhesives (SM, Scotch $Bond^{TM}$ Multipurpose; SB, $Adper^{TM}$ Single Bond 2; SE, $Clearfil^{(R)}$ SE Bond; AQ, AQ $Bond^{TM}$; TS, $Clearfil^{(R)}$ tri-S Bond). Except SM and SB, they have a simplified one- or two-step application protocols in compare with the dentin adhesives conventional three-step protocols. For the microtensile bond strength test, the labial surfaces of bovine incisors were used. Following exposure of dentin layer, according to their manufacturer's directions, each dentin adhesives were applied and composite resin blocks were constructed. The teeth were sectioned for specimen and tested microtensile bond strength. Also observed the fracture mode of interface. The obtained results were as follows : 1. The microtensile bond strength values ranged from 51.34 to 24.04 MPa on dentin(in decreasing order, SE, SM, SB, AQ and TS). 2. The highest microtensile bond strength was by SE and SM on bovine dentin, and the lowest by AQ and TS. 3. SM, SB and SE showed cohesive failures and adhesive failure but AQ, TS presented almost adhesive failures. In summary, microtensile bond strengths of single-step adhesives (AQ and TS) on bovine dentin were significantly lower than those of multi-step adhesives (SM, SB and SE) (p<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.312-318
• /
• 2005

This study compared the microtensile bond strength $({\mu}TBS)$ of three single step adhesives to dentin. Occlusal superficial dentin was exposed in fifteen human molars. They were assigned to three groups by used adhesives: Xeno group (Xeno III). Prompt group (Adper Prompt L-Pop). AQ group (AQ Bond). Each adhesive was applied to dentin surface. and composite of same manufacturer was constructed. The bonded specimens were sectioned into sticks with an interface area approximately $1mm^2$, and subjected to $\mu$ TBS testing with a crosshead speed of 1mm/minute. The results of this study were as follows; 1. The ${\mu}TBS$ to dentin was $48.78\pm9.83MPa$ for Xeno III. $30.22\pm4.52MPa$ for Adper Prompt L-Pop. and $26.31\pm7.07MPa$ for AQ Bond. 2. The mean ${\mu}TBS$ of Xeno group was significantly higher than that of Prompt group and AQ group (p<0.05). 3. There was no significant difference between the ${\mu}TBS$ of Prompt group and AQ group.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.162-169
• /
• 2004

This study evaluated the marginal microleakage of five single step adhesives. Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of the single step adhesives and composite resins：Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z-250 (Group 1), AQ Bond/Metafil CX (Group 2), One-Up Bond F/Palfique Toughwell (Group 3). Futurabond/Admira (Group 4), Xeno III/Spectrum TPH (Group 5). The restored teeth were thermocycled. Microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye solution. The teeth were bisected buccolingually and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney tests. The results of this study were as follows：1. Microleakage of enamel margins in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 1, 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05). 2. Microleakage of dentin margins in group 1 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 5, and that in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05). 3. Dentin marginal microleakage was higher than enamel marginal microleakage in all experimental groups. In conclusion, Prompt L-Pop showed the least leakage at enamel margin, and AQ Bond showed at dentin margin in this study. Marginal miroleakage in dentin was higher than that in enamel.