Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional, one-step, and self-etching adhesive systems

被引:135
作者
Bouillaguet, S
Gysi, P
Wataha, JC
Ciucchi, B
Cattani, M
Godin, C
Meyer, JM
机构
[1] Univ Geneva, Sch Dent Med, Dept Cariol Endodont & Pediat Dent, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland
[2] Med Coll Georgia, Sch Dent, Dept Oral Rehabil, Augusta, GA 30912 USA
[3] Geneva State Dent Clin, CH-1204 Geneva, Switzerland
[4] Univ Geneva, Sch Dent Med, Dept Biomat, CH-1205 Geneva, Switzerland
关键词
dentin; adhesive systems; bond strength; microtensile testing;
D O I
10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00049-X
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 [口腔医学];
摘要
Objectives: This in vitro study compared the dentin bonding performance of eight adhesive systems using a microtensile bond strength test. Methods: Thirty bovine teeth were ground to 600-grit to obtain hat root-dentin surfaces. Two conventional adhesive systems (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus, OptiBond FL), four one-step adhesive systems (Scotchbond 1, Asba S.A.C., Prime and Bond NT, Excite) and two self-etching adhesive materials (Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V and Prompt L-Pop) were evaluated. Each bonding system was applied according to manufacturer's instructions and followed by composite (2100) application. Immediately after bonding, the teeth were prepared for microtensile testing. Bond strength to dentin was measured using a Vitrodyne V- 1000 universal tester. There were 14 replicates for each material. Fractured specimens were further observed by SEM. Results: Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus exhibited significantly (p < 0.05) higher bond strength values (30.3 +/- 9.3 MPa) than all other materials. The bond strengths of the other materials were (from highest to lowest): Opitbond FL (22.4 +/- 4.3 MPa); Scotchbond 1(18.9 +/- 3.2); Clearfil Liner Bond 2 V(18.9 +/- 3.0); Prime and Bond NT(18.3 +/- 6.9); Asba S.A.C. (14.3 +/- 2.9); Excite(13.8 +/- 3.7); and Prompt L-Pop (9.1 +/- 3.3). Statistical comparisons frequently overlapped, but Optibond was significantly (1,< 0.05) greater than Asba, Excite, and Prompt L-Pop; whereas, Scotchbond 1 was only significantly (p < 0.05) greater than Prompt L-Pop. Asba, Excite and Prompt L-Pop were not significantly different. The fracture modes were mostly adhesive. Conclusions: The conventional adhesive systems produced higher bond strengths to root dentin than most one-step adhesives and one self-etching adhesive; with the exception of one material in each respective system. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:55 / 61
页数:7
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]
Abdalla A I, 1993, Am J Dent, V6, P295
[2]
Microtensile bond strength testing and failure analysis of two dentin adhesives [J].
Armstrong, SR ;
Boyer, DB ;
Keller, JC .
DENTAL MATERIALS, 1998, 14 (01) :44-50
[3]
BEALL FE, 1990, J DENT RES, V69, P242
[4]
Ciucchi B, 1997, REV MENS SUISSE ODON, V107, P32
[5]
Erickson R L, 1994, J Esthet Dent, V6, P227, DOI 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1994.tb00864.x
[6]
The dentin substrate: structure and properties related to bonding [J].
Marshall, GW ;
Marshall, SJ ;
Kinney, JH ;
Balooch, M .
JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 1997, 25 (06) :441-458
[7]
THE PROMOTION OF ADHESION BY THE INFILTRATION OF MONOMERS INTO TOOTH SUBSTRATES [J].
NAKABAYASHI, N ;
KOJIMA, K ;
MASUHARA, E .
JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS RESEARCH, 1982, 16 (03) :265-273
[8]
Nakabayashi N., 1998, HYBRIDIZATION DENT H
[9]
Nakajima M, 2000, OPER DENT, V25, P2
[10]
Pashley D H, 1993, Quintessence Int, V24, P618