J Korean Acad Conserv Dent.  2006 Nov;31(6):445-451. 10.5395/JKACD.2006.31.6.445.

Effects of one or two applications of all-in-one adhesive on microtensile bond strength to unground enamel

• Son CY
• Kim HC
• Hur B
• Park JK

• KMID: 1986887
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2006.31.6.445

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to compare the effects of one or two applications of all-in-one adhesives on microtensile bond strengths (microTBS) to unground enamel and to investigate the morphological changes in enamel surfaces treated with these adhesives using a scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Twenty-five noncarious, unrestored human mandibular molars were used. The unground enamel surfaces were cleansed with pumice. The following adhesives were applied to lingual, mid-coronal surfaces according to manufacture's directions; Clearfil SE bond in SE group, Adper Prompt L-Pop(TM)1 coat in LP1 group, 2 coats in LP2 group, Xeno(R) III 1 coat in XN1 group, and 2 coats in XN2 group. After application of the adhesives, a hybrid light-activated resin composite was built up on the unground enamel. Each tooth was sectioned to make a cross-sectional area of approximately 1.0 mm2 for each stick. The microtensile bond strength was determined. Each specimen was observed under SEM to examine the morphological changes. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA. The results of this study were as follows; 1. The microtensile bond strength values were; SE (19.77+/-2.44 MPa), LP1 (13.88+/-3.67 MPa), LP2 (14.50+/-2.52 MPa), XN1 (14.42+/-2.51 MPa) and XN2 (15.28+/-2.79 MPa). SE was significantly higher than the other groups in bond strength (p < 0.05). All groups except SE were not significantly different in bond strength (p < 0.05). 2. All groups were characterized as shallow and irregular etching patterns.

Keyword

Unground enamel; All-in-one adhesive; Microtensile bond strength; Morphological change

MeSH Terms

Adhesives*
Dental Enamel*
Humans
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning
Molar
Tooth
Adhesives

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 The SEM photographs show unground enamel surface treated with the two-step self-etching primer, Clearfil™ SE Bond (a), the unfilled, all-in-one adhesive, Adper Prompt L-Pop™ (b; 1 coat, c; 2 coats) and the filled, all-in-one adhesive, Xeno® III (d; 1 coat, e; 2 coats) (× 1000).

Reference

1. Friedl KH, Hiller KA, Schmalz G. Placement and replacement of composite restorations in Germany. Oper Dent. 1995. 20:34–38.

2. Opdam NJM, Roeters FJM, Feilzer AJ, Smale I. A radiographic and scanning electron microscopic study of apporximal margins of Class II resin composite restorations placed in vivo. J Dent. 1998. 26:319–327.

3. Senawongse P, Sattabanasuk V, Shimada Y, Otsuki M, Tagami J. Bond strengths of current adhesive systems on intact and ground enamel. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2004. 16:107–116.

4. Chigira H, Yukitani W, Hasegawa T, Manabe A, Itoh K, Hayakawa T, Debari K, Wakmoto S, Hisamitu H. Self-etching dentin primers containgin Phenyl-P. J Dent Res. 1994. 73:1088–1095.

5. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent. 1997. 25:355–372.

6. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res. 1955. 34:849–853.

7. Pilecki P, Stone DG, Sherriff M, Watson TF. Microtensile bond strengths to enamel of self-etching and one bottle adhesive systems. J Oral Rehabil. 2005. 32:531–540.

8. Ten Cate JM, Keizer S, Arends J. Polymer adhesion to enamel. The influence of viscosity and penetration. J Oral Rehabil. 1977. 4:149–156.

9. Perdigao J, Geraldeli S. Bonding characteristics of self-etching adhesives to intact versus prepared enamel. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003. 15:32–41.

10. Oh SK, Hur B, Kim HC. The etching effects and microtensile bond strength of total etching and self-etching adhesive system on unground enamel. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004. 29:273–280.

11. Kanemura N, Sano H, Tagami J. Tensile bond strength to and SEM evaluation of ground and intact enamel surfaces. J Dent. 1999. 27:523–530.

12. Perdigao J, Duarte S Jr. Enamel bond strengths of pairs of adhesives from the same manufacturer. Oper Dent. 2005. 30:492–499.

13. Hashimoto M, Sano H, Yoshida E, Hori M, Kaga M, Oguchi H, Pashley DH. Effects of multiple adhesive coatings on dentin bonding. Oper Dent. 2004. 29:416–423.

14. Fritz UB, Finger WJ. Bonding efficiency of single-bottle enamel/dentin adhesives. Am J Dent. 1999. 12:277–282.

15. Frankenberger R, Perdigao J, Rosa BT, Lopes M. No-bottle vs. Multi-bottle dentin adhesives-a microtensile bond strength and morphological study. Dent Mater. 2001. 17:373–380.

16. Nikaido T, Nakajima M, Higashi T, Kanemura N, Pereira P, Tagami J. Shear bond strength of a single-step bonding system to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater J. 1997. 16:40–47.

17. Sturdevant CM, Barton RE, Sockwell CL, Strickland WD. The art and science of operative dentistry. 1985. 2nd ed. St. Louis, Missouri: The C.V. Mosby Co.;54–55.

18. Nathanson D, Bodkin JL, Evans JR. SEM of etching patterns in surface and subsurface enamel. J Pedod. 1982. 7:11–17.

19. Cehreli ZC, Altay N. Effects of a non-rinse conditioner and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the etch pattern of intact human permanent enamel. Angle Orthodont. 2000. 70:22–27.

20. Gwinnett AJ. The ultrastructure of prismless enamel of permanent teeth. Arch Oral Biol. 1967. 12:381–386.

21. Finger WJ, Fritz U. Laboratory evaluation of one-component enamel/dentin bonding agents. Am J Dent. 1996. 9:206–210.

22. Ferrari M, Mannocci F, Vichi A, Davidson C. Effect of two etching times on the sealing ability of Clearfil Liner Bond 2 in Class V restorations. Am J Dent. 1997. 10:66–70.

23. Miyazaki M, Ando S, Hinoura K, Onose H, Moore BK. Influence of filler addition to bonding agents on shear bond strength to bovine dentin. Dent Mater. 1995. 11:234–238.

24. Ibarra G, Vargas MA, Armstrong SR, Cobb DS. Microtensile bond strength of self-etching adhesives to ground and unground enamel. J Adhes Dent. 2002. 4:115–124.