Bond strength of calcium silicate-based sealers to dentine dried with different techniques

To assess the influence of various canal-drying techniques on the push-out bond strength between radicular dentine and both MTA Fillapex and iRoot SP sealers. Eighty extracted single-root teeth were instrumented with ProTaper Universal rotary instruments to a size F4. The teeth were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups as follows: group 1, excess fluid in the canals was removed using a Luer vacuum adapter; group 2, the canals were dried with a single paper point; group 3, the canals were dried with 3-5 paper points, and group 4, the canals were rinsed with 95% ethanol and then dried with 3-5 paper points. In each group, the specimens were subgrouped according to root canal sealer into either subgroup A [MTA Fillapex] or subgroup B [iRoot SP sealer]. Horizontal sections [thickness 1 +/- 0.1 mm] were obtained from each specimen and a push-out test was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min on root slices. Statistical analysis was done using the Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's test for pair-wise comparisons. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Canals dried with only 1 paper point and obturated with the iRoot SP sealer [subgroup 2B] showed significantly higher bond strengths to the root canal wall compared to all other subgroups [p < 0.05], except for subgroup 1B [p > 0.05].Conclusions: The canal-drying technique influenced the adhesive bond strength between calcium silicate-based root canal sealers and the root canal wall

Effects of conventional and self-etching adhesive systems on bond strength of orthodontic attachments bonded to erupted and unerupted teeth / 대한치과교정학회지

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and failure-mode of orthodontic buttons bonded to erupted and unerupted teeth with conventional and self-etching adhesive systems. METHODS: Eighty-four erupted and 84 unerupted, human third-molar teeth were used. For both groups, the buccal surfaces of each tooth were assigned one of the following type of adhesive systems (n = 12). A, Conventional systems: 1, Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA); 2, Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply/Caulk, Milford, USA); 3, Single Bond (3M ESPE, Minnesota, USA); and B, Self-etching adhesives; 4, Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray, Okayama, Japan); 5, Transbond Plus (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA); 6, Clearfil S3 (Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan); 7, G Bond (GC, Tokyo, Japan). The SBSs of the attachments and the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were recorded. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA), independent-sample t-test and chi-square tests. RESULTS: When the SBSs of erupted and unerupted teeth were compared, only the Clearfil-SE Bond and G-Bond were significantly different. Bond strengths of all adhesive systems were higher in unerupted teeth than erupted teeth, except the Single-Bond system. CONCLUSIONS: When using conventional adhesives, bonding to erupted and unerupted teeth may not be significantly different. However, clinicians need to take into consideration the types of self-etching systems before usage.