The journal of adhesive dentistry最新文献

Purpose: Multiple materials are found in the root canal after fiber-post cementation. The layer of a bioceramic-based (BC) sealer may affect the bond strength (σBS) of the fiber post in the root canal. The purpose of this study was to employ multilayer composite-disk models in diametral compression to investigate whether the bond strength between a fiber post and root dentin can be increased by the application of a primer on the BC sealer.

Materials and methods: The multilayers of materials in the root canal required 3D finite-element (FE) stress analyses (FEA) to provide precise σBS values. First, BC sealer was characterized using x-ray powder diffraction (XRD) to determine when the sealer completely set and the types of crystals formed to select which primer to apply to the sealer. We selected a 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (10-MDP)-based primer to treat the BC sealer before post cementation. Ultra-highspeed (UHS) imaging was utilized to analyze the crack initiation interface. The obtained failure force was used in FE analysis to calculate σBS.

Results: UHS imaging validated the fracture interface at the post-dentin junction as FEA simulations predicted. σBS values of the fiber posts placed with various material combinations in the root canal were 21.1 ± 3.4 (only cement/ post), 22.2 ± 3.4 (BC sealer/cement/post) and 28.6 ± 4.3 MPa (10-MDP primer treated BC sealer/cement/post). The 10-MDP-treated BC sealer exhibited the highest σBS (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The multilayer composite disk model proved reliable with diametral compression testing. The presence of BC sealer in the root canal does not reduce σBS of the fiber post. Conditioning the BC sealer layer with 10-MDP primer before fiber-post cemen-tation increases σBS.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the bonding effectiveness of two HEMA/BPA-free universal adhesives (UAs) to flat dentin, to characterize their adhesive-dentin interfacial ultrastructure, and to measure their water sorption (Wsp), water solubility (Wsl), and hydrophobicity.

Materials and methods: The immediate and aged (50,000 thermocycles) microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to flat dentin of the HEMA/BPA-free UAs Healbond Max (HbMax; Elsodent) and Healbond MP (HbMP; Elsodent) as well as the reference adhesives OptiBond FL (Opti-FL; Kerr), Clearfil SE Bond 2 (C-SE2; Kuraray Noritake), and Scotchbond Universal (SBU; 3M Oral Care) was measured. The adhesive-dentin interfaces of HbMax and HbMP were characterized by TEM. Wsp and Wsl of all adhesive resins and of the primer/adhesive resin mixtures of HbMax, Opti-FL, and C-SE2 were measured. Hydrophobicity was determined by measuring the contact angle of water dropped on adhesive-treated dentin.

Results: In terms of µTBS, HbMax and HbMP performed statistically similarly to Opti-FL and C-SE2, but outperformed SBU. Aging only significantly reduced the μTBS of SBU when applied in E&R bonding mode. TEM revealed typical E&R and SE hybrid-layer ultrastructures at dentin, while electron-lucent globules of unknown origin, differing in size and shape, were observed within the adhesive resin of HbMP and even more frequently in that of HbMax. Higher Wsp was measured for the primer/adhesive resin mixtures than for the adhesive resins. Opti-FL was more hydrophobic than all other adhesives tested.

Conclusion: The HEMA/BPA-free UAs bonded durably to flat dentin with bond strengths comparable to those of the gold-standard E&R/SE adhesives and superior to that of the HEMA/BPA-containing 1-step UA.

Purpose: This study investigated and compared the bond strengths, microleakage, microgaps, and marginal adaptation of self-adhesive resin composites (SAC) to dentin with or without universal adhesives.

Materials and methods: Dentin surfaces of 75 molars were prepared for shear and microtensile bond strength testing (SBS and µTBS). Silicon molds were used to build up direct restorations using the following materials to form 5 groups: 1. Surefil One; 2. Prime&Bond active Universal Adhesive + Surefil One; 3. Vertise Flow; 4. OptiBond Universal + Vertise Flow; 5. Scotchbond Universal + Filtek Z500 (control group). Bonded specimens were thermocycled 10,000x before being tested either for SBS or µTBS using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Direct mesial and distal class-II cavities were created on 100 sound premolars, with the gingival margin of distal cavities placed below CEJ and restored according to the five groups. After thermocycling, microleakage scores were assessed following immersion of restored premolars in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 h, while marginal gaps and adaptation percentages were investigated on epoxy resin replicas under SEM at magnifications of 2000X and 200X, respectively. Results were statistically analyzed with parametric and non-parametric tests as applicable, with a level of significance set at α = 0.05.

Results: Bond strengths, microleakage scores, microgaps, and percent marginal adaptation of Surefil One and Vertise Flow were significantly (p < 0.001) inferior to the control group. Dentin preconditioning with universal adhesives significantly increased the study parameter outcomes of Surefil One and Vertise Flow, yet they were still significantly below the performance of the control group.

Conclusion: Conventional resin composite outperformed the SAC whether applied solely or in conjunction with their corresponding universal adhesives.

Purpose: The study evaluated the clinical performance of partial indirect resin composite (PIRC) restorations with "proximal box elevation" (PBE) placed in molars.

Materials and methods: Sixty-three patients received 80 posterior PIRC (SR Nexco, Ivoclar Vivadent) restorations. Large posterior defects with cuspal loss and deep cervical margins were included in the study. PBE was performed prior to preparation and impression making. Two independent observers evaluated the restorations using the FDI criteria (scores 1-5) for esthetic, functional, and biological properties. Patients were recalled at 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years. Overall success rates were calculated (Kaplan-Meier analysis) and compared (log-rank tests) according to baseline variables. The impact of the baseline variables on the failure of the restorations was analyzed (multiple proportional Cox regression).

Results: Seventy-nine (98.7%), 69 (88.4%), 66 (92.9%), 44 (86.2%) and 45 (91.8%) PIRCs completed their follow up at baseline, 6 months, and 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. In total, 10 failures were observed: 5 with partial loss, 4 with material chipping, and one with secondary caries, yielding an overall success rate of 87.5% and a survival rate of 93.8%, with a mean observation time of 26.5 ± 13.6 months.

Conclusions: PIRCs with PBE demonstrated a high survival rate and satisfactory esthetic properties. Failure was less likely for PIRC restorations with partial cuspal coverage (onlay) compared to full cuspal coverage (overlay).

Purpose: To compare the adhesion of a self-curing (Tokuyama Universal Bond, TUB) and a light-curing (Scotchbond Universal, SBU) universal adhesive to CAD/CAM materials, enamel, and dentin. This study also assessed differences in enamel adhesion between self-etch vs selective etching modes, as well as immediate and long-term adhesion to dentin for both adhesives.

Materials and methods: Shear bond strength (SBS) testing was used to assess adhesion to enamel, dentin, Lava Ultimate (LU), Vita Enamic (VE), IPS e.max CAD (LD), IPS e.max ZirCAD (3Y-Zir), and Lava Esthetic (5Y-Zir) (n = 10). Moreover, bonding to enamel in self-etch and selective etching modes (n = 10) as well as immediate and aged resin-dentin bond strength (24 h after bonding, after 100,000 thermal cycles [TC] and long-term storage) was evaluated using the microtensile bond-strength test (n = 30). Failure mode was also determined for the bonding to dentin. Statistical analyses consisted of one-way and two-way ANOVA with appropriate post-hoc Tukey-Kramer or two-sample t-tests, as well as the chi-squared or Fisher's exact test (α = 0.05).

Results: TUB and SBU universal adhesives presented similar bonding to LU, VE, 3Y-Zir, and 5Y-Zir. However, SBS for TUB was superior to SBU when bonding to lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic (IPS e.max CAD). SBU showed better adhesion to dentin and enamel when used in the self-etch mode, while TUB promoted strong bond strength to enamel in the selective etching mode. TUB after TC was the only aging condition that yielded a significant reduction in resin-dentin bond strength.

Conclusion: In-vitro adhesion performance of the self-curing and light-curing universal adhesives varies depending on the dental substrate or CAD/CAM restorative material used for bonding.

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of different lithium-disilicate (LiSi) glass-ceramic surface decontamination procedures on the shear bond strength (SBS) to resin cement.

Materials and methods: Seventy CAD/CAM LiSi ceramic specimens (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar) were cut and sintered. Fifty specimens were treated with 5% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 20 s, while 20 were left untreated. All 70 specimens were then contaminated with human saliva and try-in silicone paste. The following surface cleaning methods were investigated (n = 10): C: water rinsing (control); PA: 37% H3PO4 etching for 20 s; E: 70% ethanol applied for 20 s; CP: cleaning paste (Ivoclean, Ivoclar) brushed for 20 s; HFSEP: self-etching ceramic primer (Monobond Etch&Prime, Ivoclar) rubbed for 20 s; HF: 5% HF applied for 20 s or no HF etching prior to contamination; SEP: self-etching ceramic primer rubbed for 20 s and no HF etching prior to contamination. Composite cylinders were created and luted with an adhesive resin cement to the decontaminated surfaces. After storage for 24 h at 37°C, the SBS test was conducted. Two fractured specimens per group were observed under SEM to perform fractographic analysis. The data were statistically analyzed with p set at <0.05.

Results: The type of surface cleaning approach influenced bond strength (p < 0.001). HFSEP, SEP, and HF attained higher SBS (p < 0.001) compared to other groups. None of the approaches were able to completely remove contaminants from the ceramic surfaces. SEM images showed residual traces of contaminants on CP-treated surfaces.

Conclusions: The self-etching ceramic primer enhanced bond strength to contaminated LiSi ceramic surfaces, irrespective of previous treatment with hydrofluoric acid.

Purpose: To investigate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) to dentin in class-I cavities using different layering techniques, adhesive application modes, and aging.

Materials and methods: 150 caries-free human molars were randomly assigned to 8 experimental and 2 control groups (n=15 teeth/ group). For each tooth, a standardized class-I cavity was prepared (4x4x4 mm) and pretreated with a universal adhesive (self-etch or etch-and-rinse mode). Incrementally layered restorations served as the control. In the experimental groups, either lining with bulk-fill flowable composite and a layering technique, bulk filling, or the snowplow technique with one or two layers of viscous composite were applied. Four microsticks were obtained from each cavity. Half were tested initially and the other half after aging (thermocycling, 15,000 cycles, 5-55°C, n=30 sticks/group). Tobit regression was used for analyzing group differences, including analysis of interactions, Pearson's chi-squared test or Fishers's exact test for fracture analyses (significance level 0.05).

Results: Regression analysis showed significant differences in µTBS between groups initially and after aging. In both etching modes, lining with a bulk-fill flowable composite and layering technique achieved the highest µTBS both initially and after aging. In contrast to the etching mode (self-etch < etch-and-rinse), aging did not influence µTBS significantly. The predominant failure types were adhesive and mixed, with a significantly lower number of pre-test failures in the etch-and-rinse groups.

Conclusion: The etch-and-rinse mode achieves higher µTBS in class-I cavities compared to the self-etch mode. The lining technique with bulk-fill flowable composite as well as the snowplow technique yielded the highest µTBS after aging, whereas bulk filling and its combination with the snowplow technique resulted in lower µTBS.

Purpose: This study evaluated the long-term push-out bond strength (PBS) and nanoleakage (NL) of universal adhesives with different photo-initiator systems in the root canals of teeth in which fiber posts were luted.

Materials and methods: One-hundred twenty endodontically treated human premolars were randomly divided into 12 groups based on the following factors: adhesives (Scotchbond Universal [SBU], Ambar Universal [AMB], and Ambar Universal APS [AMB-APS]); adhesive strategy (etch-and-rinse and self-etch), and time of testing (immediately vs after 2 years). The posts were cemented, sectioned into slices, tested for PBS at 0.5 mm/min, and examined for NL using scanning electron microscopy immediately thereafter or after 2 years of water storage. Data were evaluated using a four-way ANOVA (root thirds vs time vs universal adhesive vs adhesive strategies) and Tukey's test (α = 5%).

Results: For both evaluation times, AMB-APS demonstrated no significant difference in the PBS or NL when different radicular thirds were compared (p > 0.05). However, for SBU and AMB, the cervical third demonstrated higher PBS and lower NL than those of the apical third at both time points (p < 0.0001). AMB-APS exhibited higher PBS and lower NL in the apical third in comparison with SBU and AMB (p < 0.0001). SBU and AMB displayed a significant decrease in the PBS and increased NL after 2 years (p < 0.0001), whereas AMB-APS demonstrated no significant signs of degradation even after 2 years of water storage (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: Independent of the root third evaluated, the universal adhesive containing APS photo-initiator system demonstrated bonding stability at the adhesive interface between the root canal and fiber posts, even after 2 years of water storage.

Purpose: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of in-vitro bond strength to glass-ceramics using hydrofluoric acid (HF) at lower (<5%) and higher (>5%) concentrations ([HF]) to treat ceramic surfaces.

Methods: Systematic searches were carried out in PubMed, Scopus, LILACS, and Web of Science for articles published through July 2021, and a meta-analysis was performed to estimate the combined effect by comparing the differences between the standardized means of the bond strengths of the evaluated materials.

Results: In total, 943 articles were found, of which 17 studies were selected for qualitative analysis and 12 for quantitative analysis. The bond strength to glass-ceramics using 4% to 5% HF did not differ from that using 7% to 10% HF for the following HF etching times and glass-ceramic materials: 20 s for lithium-disilicate (Z = 0.65, p = 0.51), 60 s for feldspathic (Z = 0.53, p = 0.60), and 60 s for leucite (Z = 0.72, p = 0.35).

Conclusion: The lower concentration HF (<5%) etchant is a reliable surface treatment for adhesive bonding to glass-ceramics with satisfactory bond strength in short-term evaluations.

Purpose: To investigate the bonding performance of three universal adhesives (UAs) to dentin and the effect of different curing modes and hydrofluoric-acid (HF) etching of lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic on the adhesive performance of two UA/composite cement (CC) combinations.

Materials and methods: In the first project part, the immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of the two light-curing UAs G2-Bond Universal (G2B; GC) and Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBUp; 3M Oral Care), and the self-curing UA Tokuyama Universal Bond II (TUBII; Tokuyama) to flat dentin was measured, when applied in both E&R and SE bonding mode using a split-tooth design (n = 10). The resultant adhesive-dentin interfaces were characterized using TEM. In the second project part, CAD/CAM composite blocks were luted to flat dentin with either Scotchbond Universal Plus/RelyX Universal (SBUp/RxU; 3M Oral Care) or Tokuyama Universal Bond II/Estecem II Plus (TUBII/ECIIp; Tokuyama Dental) using different curing modes (AA mode: auto-curing of both adhesive and cement; AL mode: auto-curing of adhesive and light-curing of cement), upon which their immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) µTBS was measured. In the third project part, the same UA/CC combinations were luted to CAD/CAM glass-ceramic to measure their immediate and aged (6-month water storage) shear bond strength (SBS).

Results: In E&R bonding mode, the performance of G2B, SBUp and TUBII was not significantly different in terms of µTBS, while G2B and SBUp significantly outperformed TUBII in SE bonding mode. No significant difference in µTBS was found between the SBUp/RxU and TUBII/ECIIp UA/CC combinations, regardless of bonding mode, aging time, or curing mode. The cement-curing mode did not significantly influence µTBS, while a significantly higher µTBS was recorded for the UA/CC combinations applied in E&R bonding mode. HF significantly improved the SBS of the UA/CC combinations to glass-ceramic.

Conclusion: The self-curing adhesive performed better when applied in E&R than in SE bonding mode. The curing mode did not influence the adhesive performance of the composite cements, while an E&R bonding mode rendered more favorable adhesion in a self-curing luting protocol. When bonding to glass-ceramic, the adhesive performance of the universal adhesive/composite cement combinations benefited from HF etching.