scholarly journals Microshear Bond Strength of a Self-adhesive Composite to Erbium Laser-Treated Primary Enamel

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-186
Author(s):  
Tara Zarabian ◽  
Saba Azadi Mood ◽  
Nazanin Kiomarsi ◽  
Homa Noorollahian ◽  
Neda Hakimiha
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Laser Irradiation ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Enamel Surface ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Flowable Composites

Introduction: Advances have been made in the composition of flowable composites in recent years and self-adhering composites, which do not require a bonding agent, have recently been introduced to the market. This study aimed to assess the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of a self-adhering flowable composite (Vertise) to primary enamel treated with a graphite disc with silicon carbide particles (SIC) and laser irradiation, the result of which was compared to that of a conventional flowable composite (Premise). Methods: In this in vitro, experimental study, 72 samples of sound primary enamel were evaluated. A smooth enamel surface was obtained using a graphite disc. Next, the erbium chromium yttrium scandium gallium garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser was used for enamel surface treatment in half of the samples (n=36). All the samples were then randomly divided into 4 groups of (i) Premise flowable composite (PF) without laser (n=18), (ii) Vertise flowable composite (VF) without laser (n=18), (iii) PF with laser (n=18), and (iv) VF with laser (n=18). The teeth were then incubated at 37°C for 24 hours and were then subjected to thermocycling. The µSBS of samples was measured using a universal testing machine and reported in megapascal (MPa). Data were analyzed using SPSS via the two-way ANOVA and independent-samples t test at P<0.05. Results: The mean µSBS of VF was significantly higher to the laser-treated samples (13.60±5.47) compared with the non-treated samples (5.89±2.42) (P<0.001). However, no significant difference was noted in the µSBS of PF to the laser-treated (13.18±3.45) and non-treated samples (16.06±3.52) (P=0.058). Conclusion: The µSBS of the conventional flowable composite is higher than that of the selfadhering flowable composite to the enamel of primary teeth. Enamel surface treatment with laser irradiation increases the µSBS of self-adhering flowable composites.

scholarly journals Microshear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Systems to Dentin

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Valizadeh ◽  
Aida Moradi ◽  
Mansooreh Mirazei ◽  
Hooman Amiri ◽  
Mohammad Javad Kharazifard
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Composite Cylinders

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of various adhesive systems to dentin. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro experimental study, 60 sound human third molars were divided into four groups. Dentin discs were prepared of middle-third dentin measuring 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness. Dentin surfaces were bonded with one of the four types of adhesives: (A) Single Bond (3M ESPE), Scotchbond Universal (3M ESPE) in etch and rinse (B) and self-etch (C) modes and (D) Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Noritake Dental). After the application of adhesive systems according to the manufacturers’ instructions, composite cylinders (Vit-l-escence) were bonded to dentin surfaces. The μSBS test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Results: The µSBS was the highest in self-etch Scotchbond Universal (15.8±6.08 MPa) followed by Clearfil SE Bond (15.24±4.6 MPa), etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal (11.68±4.07MPa) and Single Bond (11.24±3.74 MPa). A significant difference was only found between Single Bond and etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal groups (P=0.04). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, application of Scotchbond Universal in self-etch mode provides a reliable bond to dentin.

scholarly journals Microshear Bond Strength of Different Adhesive Systems to Dentin

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Valizadeh ◽  
Aida Moradi ◽  
Mansooreh Mirazei ◽  
Hooman Amiri ◽  
Mohammad Javad Kharazifard
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Composite Cylinders

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of various adhesive systems to dentin. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro experimental study, 60 sound human third molars were divided into four groups. Dentin discs were prepared of middle-third dentin measuring 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness. Dentin surfaces were bonded with one of the four types of adhesives: (A) Single Bond (3M ESPE), Scotchbond Universal (3M ESPE) in etch and rinse (B) and self-etch (C) modes and (D) Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray Noritake Dental). After the application of adhesive systems according to the manufacturers’ instructions, composite cylinders (Vit-l-escence) were bonded to dentin surfaces. The μSBS test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Results: The µSBS was the highest in self-etch Scotchbond Universal (15.8±6.08 MPa) followed by Clearfil SE Bond (15.24±4.6 MPa), etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal (11.68±4.07MPa) and Single Bond (11.24±3.74 MPa). A significant difference was only found between Single Bond and etch and rinse Scotchbond Universal groups (P=0.04). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, application of Scotchbond Universal in self-etch mode provides a reliable bond to dentin.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Microshear Bond Strength of Self-Adhesive Versus Conventional Flowable Resin Composite to Sound and Affected Dentin: An In Vitro Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 306-312
Author(s):  
Dalia M. Abouelmagd ◽  
Hanan K. Abouelseoud
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Vitro Study ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Vertise Flow

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of self-adhesive flowable composite and conventional bonded flowable composite to sound and caries affected dentin. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, a total of freshly extracted 40 human molar teeth were used. The occlusal surface was sectioned to expose dentin for µSBS test. The teeth were randomly divided into 2 groups according to the type of flowable composite used into two groups (n=20): group A: self- adhesive flowable composite (Vertise flow), group B: Filtek Z350-XT flowable composite and one-step self-etch adhesive Adper Easy One. A plastic cylindrical mold was used to construct resin composite cylinders (0.8mm diameter x 1mm length) on the sound and caries affected exposed dentin and filled with flowable composite restorative materials according to manufacturer’s instructions. The samples were then immersed in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours, and underwent µSBS test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed using Student's t-test to compare between the two materials as well as to compare between sound and caries affected dentin. Results: The mean values of µSBS of Filtek Z-350XT to sound and caries affected were 26.6 and 26.7 MPa respectively. The mean µSBS of Vertise Flow to sound and affected were 13.2 and 17.9 MPa respectively. With sound dentin FiltekZ-350XT showed statistically significant higher µSBS than Vertise flow. With caries affected dentin, there was no statistically significant difference between the two materials. There was no statistically significant difference between µSBS of sound and caries affected dentin within each material. The significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the conventional flowable composite yielded the highest µSBS to sound dentin. There was no statistical significant difference in µSBS of self-adhesive and conventional flowable to caries affected dentin. Key words: Composite Resins; Dentin; microshear.

scholarly journals Influence of etching time and bonding strategies on the microshear bond strength of self- and light-cured pit-and-fissure sealants

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 477-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo José Souza-Junior ◽  
Boniek Castillo Dutra Borges ◽  
Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes ◽  
Roberta Caroline Bruschi Alonso ◽  
Glaucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Failure Modes ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Etching Time ◽  
Fissure Sealants ◽  
Pit And Fissure Sealants ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
The Impact

This study evaluated the impact of extended etching and bonding strategies on the microshear bond strength of three sealant materials. Two pit-and-fissure sealants [FluroShield, Dentsply (light-cured) and AlphaSeal, DFL (self-cured)] and one light-cured flowable composite resin (Permaflo, Ultradent) were evaluated according to different enamel etching times (15 s or 30 s) and bonding procedures (no adhesive application, application of primer/hydrophobic resin or hydrophobic resin only). Intact enamel blocks were obtained from bovine teeth and sealed via the tested protocols. After 24 h, the microshear bond strength test was performed in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Failure modes were classified by stereomicroscopy. Data were submitted to a three-way ANOVA and to Tukey's test (α=0.05). There was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) among the materials. Permaflo showed higher bond strength when etched for 30 s alone. Enamel overetching decreased the bond strength of the light-cured sealant. Primer/bond previous treatment improved bond performance for AlphaSeal. In conclusion, from the tested conditions, all sealant materials presented similar bond strength values in relation to bonding protocol and etching time. The flowable composite can be used as a pit-and-fissure sealant. The use of a three-step adhesive system was essential for the self-cured sealant application.

scholarly journals Flowable Composite an Alternative Orthodontic Bonding Adhesive: An in vitro Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 883-886
Author(s):  
S Chidambaram ◽  
KV Baburam Reddy ◽  
K Supradeep Kumar ◽  
C Hanumantha Rao ◽  
HC Girish ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Bonding System ◽  
Group I ◽  
Intergroup Comparison ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Orthodontic Bonding

ABSTRACT Objective To determine the clinical applicability of Ormocer based flowable adhesive (Admira flow) in comparison with BisGMA based adhesive (Transbond XT) and Ormocer based packable adhesive (Admira). Materials and methods Sixty human premolars, divided into group I (n = 20) Transbond XT, group II (n = 20) Admira and group III (n = 20) Admira flow were bonded with metal brackets using adhesives. Brackets were debonded in shear on an Instron universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 1 mm per minute. The mode of bond failure was determined by modified ARI index. Results The results obtained from SBS evaluation and modified ARI showed highest shear bond strength for Transbond XT (SD 11.64) 3.68 followed by Admira flow (SD 11.0) 2.87 and least for Admira (SD 9.42) 2.21. However, the difference was not statistically significant, but an intergroup comparison done using Independent student ‘t’ test, showed statically significant difference between Transbond XT and Admira. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed least survival median value for Admira, but the survival median value is not statistically significant among the three groups. All groups had modified ARI score of three (60-70%), suggestive of cohesive type of failure. Conclusion The in vitro study showed that flowable Ormocer can be an good alternative to commonly used BisGMA based adhesive but the its efficacy needs clinical assessment through a survival analysis. Clinical significance Admire flow can definitely be considered as an alternative bonding system due to their comparable bond strength and debonding characters and reported properties of biocompatibility. How to cite this article Kumar KS, Rao CH, Reddy KVB, Chidambaram S, Girish HC, Murgod S. Flowable Composite an Alternative Orthodontic Bonding Adhesive: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(5):883-886.

Enamel Wetness Effects on Microshear Bond Strength of Different Bonding Agents (Adhesive Systems): An in vitro Comparative Evaluation Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 399-407
Author(s):  
Girish Kulkarni ◽  
Vinay K Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Enamel Surface ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength

ABSTRACT Aims The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of enamel wetness on microshear bond strength using different adhesive systems. Objectives To evaluate microshear bond strength of three bonding agents on dry enamel; to evaluate microshear bond strength of three bonding agents on wet enamel; and to compare microshear bond strength of three different bonding agents on dry and wet enamel. Materials and methods Sixty extracted noncarious human premolars were selected for this study. Flat enamel surfaces of approximately 3 mm were obtained by grinding the buccal surfaces of premolars with water-cooled diamond disks. This study evaluated one etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Single Bond 2) and two self-etching adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond and Xeno-V). The specimens were divided into two groups (n = 30). Group I (dry) was air-dried for 30 seconds and in group II (wet) surfaces were blotted with absorbent paper to remove excess water. These groups were further divided into six subgroups (n = 10) according to the adhesives used. The resin composite, Filtek Z 250, was bonded to flat enamel surfaces that had been treated with one of the adhesives, following the manufacturer's instructions. After being stored in water at 37°C for 24 hours, bonded specimens were stressed in universal testing machine (Fig. 3) at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The data were evaluated with one-way and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), t-test, and Tukey's Multiple Post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Results The two-way ANOVA and Tukey's Multiple Post hoc tests showed significant differences among adhesive systems, but wetness did not influence microshear bond strength (p = 0.1762). The one-way ANOVA and t-test showed that the all-in-one adhesive (Xeno-V) was the only material influenced by the presence of water on the enamel surface. Xeno-V showed significantly higher microshear bond strength when the enamel was kept wet. Single Bond 2 adhesive showed significantly higher microshear bond strength as compared with Xeno-V adhesive but no significant difference when compared with Clearfil SE Bond adhesive in dry enamel. Single Bond 2 adhesive showed no significant difference in microshear bond strength as compared with self-etching adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond and Xeno-V), when the enamel was kept wet. Conclusion From the findings of the results, it was concluded that self-etching adhesives were not negatively affected by the presence of water on the enamel surface. Clinical significance The all-in-one adhesive showed different behavior depending on whether the enamel surface was dry or wet. So the enamel surface should not be desiccated, when self-etching adhesives are used. How to cite this article Kulkarni G, Mishra VK. Enamel Wetness Effects on Microshear Bond Strength of Different Bonding Agents (Adhesive Systems): An in vitro Comparative Evaluation Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(5):399-407.

scholarly journals Effect of ultrasonic vibration on microshear bond strength of flowable composite to enamel

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahtab Ebrahimi Nezhad ◽  
Dana Jafarpour ◽  
Mahdi Gholamrezaei Saravi
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Ultrasonic Vibration ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Internal Diameter ◽  
Bonding Agents ◽  
Vibration Effect ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength ◽  
Flowable Composites

Objective: The present study aimed to assess the influence of vibration effect on microshear bond strength (µSBS) of flowable composite to enamel. Material and Methods: Sixty non-carious extracted human premolar teeth were collected and randomly divided into six groups (n = 10) after being trimmed to produce a smooth flat surface: Flowable composites [Wave (SDI), Wave HV (SDI) and Grandioflow (Voco)] were used as bonding agents without or with vibration using an ultrasonic scaler (Mini Piezon, EMS, Switzerland). Composite resin, with an internal diameter of 0.7mm and height of 1mm, was cured on the substrate. The specimens’ µSBS was tested by a microtensile tester (Bisco, USA) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The bond strength values were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test (p < 0.05). Results: Vibration did not lead to any significant difference in the µSBS values of Wave, Wave HV, and Grandio Flow µSBS values (P=0.690, P=1.000 and P=0.947, respectively). No significant difference was found between flowable composites in terms of micro shear bond strength to enamel (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The application of ultrasonic vibration might not be advantageous in terms of improving the shear bond strength of flowable composites to enamel. KEYWORDS Bond strength; Enamel; Flowable composite; Ultrasonic; Vibration.

scholarly journals Bond Strength of Self-Adhesive Flowable Composites and Glass Ionomer Cements to Primary Teeth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (21) ◽  
pp. 6694
Author(s):  
Flavia Iaculli ◽  
Alessandro Salucci ◽  
Gianni Di Giorgio ◽  
Valeria Luzzi ◽  
Gaetano Ierardo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Deciduous Teeth ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Flowable Composites

Background: Conventional composites are largely used in pediatric restorative dentistry and demonstrate successful clinical outcomes. However, the need for simplification of operative steps in young or uncooperative children demands reliable alternatives. Therefore, the aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the in vitro bond strength of glass ionomer cements (GICs) and self-adhesive flowable composites (SFCs) on deciduous teeth. Methods: A comprehensive literature search according to the PRISMA checklist was manually and electronically performed by two independent reviewers through the following databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase, to include in vitro studies comparing GICs and SFCs bond strength values of restorations on primary teeth. In addition, three groups of meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models. Results: Three articles meeting the inclusion criteria were selected and subjected to both qualitative and quantitative assessment. No statistically significant difference was found between SFC versus GIC; however, both groups significantly differed with conventional flowable composites (CFs). Conclusions: Despite the absence of significant difference in bond strength values, SFCs may be considered a valid alternative to GICs in the restoration of deciduous teeth, although CFs proved better in vitro performances.

scholarly journals Effect of surface treatments on repair strength, roughness and morphology in aged metal-free crowns

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. e206155
Author(s):  
Yançanã Luizy Gruber ◽  
Thaís Emanuelle Bakaus ◽  
Bruna Fortes Bittencourt ◽  
João Carlos Gomes ◽  
Alessandra Reis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Metal Free ◽  
Diamond Bur ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Microshear Bond Strength

Aim: The roughness and micromorphology of various surface treatments in aged metal-free crowns and the bond strength of these crowns repaired with composite resin (CR) was evaluated in vitro. Methods: A CR core build-up was confectioned in 60 premolars and prepared for metal-free crowns. Prepared teeth were molded with the addition of silicone, and the laboratory ceromer/fiber-reinforced crowns (SR Adoro/Fibrex Lab) were fabricated. Subsequently, the crowns were cemented and artificially aged in a mechanical fatigue device (1.2 X 106 cycles), then divided into 4 groups (n = 15) according to the surface treatment: 1) phosphoric acid etching (PA); 2) PA + silane application; 3) roughening with a diamond bur + PA; and 4) sandblasting with Al2O3 + PA. After the treatments, the crowns (n = 2) were qualitatively analyzed by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and surface roughness (n = 5) was analyzed before and after the surface treatment (Ra parameter). The remaining crowns (n = 8) received standard repair with an adhesive system (Tetric N-Bond) and a nanohybrid CR (Tetric N-Ceram), and the microshear bond strength (SBS) test was performed (0.5 mm/min). Roughness and SBS data were analyzed by one- and two-way ANOVA, respectively, as well as Tukey’s post-test (α = 0.05). Results: Sandblasting with Al2O3 + PA resulted in the highest final roughness and SBS values. The lowest results were observed in the PA group, whereas the silane and diamond bur groups showed intermediate values. Conclusion: It may be concluded that indirect ceromer crowns sandblasted with aluminum oxide prior to PA etching promote increased roughness surface and bond strength values.

scholarly journals Properties of Composite Materials Used for Bracket Bonding

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Caroline Silva Gama ◽  
Andre Guaraci de Vito Moraes ◽  
Lilyan Cardoso Yamasaki ◽  
Alessandro Dourado Loguercio ◽  
Ceci Nunes Carvalho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Flexural Strength ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
Flexural Modulus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Contraction Stress ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Flowable Composites

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vitro the shear bond strength to enamel, flexural strength, flexural modulus, and contraction stress of one orthodontic composite and two flowable composites. Orthodontic brackets were bonded to 45 human maxillary premolars with the composites Transbond XT, Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow and tested for shear bond strength. For measurement of flexural strength and flexural modulus, specimens were fabricated and tested under flexion. For the contraction stress test, cylindrical specimens were tested and an extensometer determined the height of the specimens. The data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The shear bond strength values were significantly lower (p<0.05) for the flowable composites compared with the orthodontic composite. For the flexural strength, no statistically significant difference was found among the composites (p>0.05) while the flexural modulus was significantly higher (p<0.05) for Transbond XT than for Filtek Z-350 flow and Opallis flow. The orthodontic composite presented significantly lower contraction stress values than the flowable composites (p<0.05). The light-activated orthodontic composite material presented higher flexural modulus and shear bond strength and lower contraction stress than both flowable composites.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document