Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Microtensile bond strength test and failure analysis to assess bonding characteristics of different adhesion approaches to ground versus unground enamel
Hipólito, Vinicius Di; Alonso, Roberta Caroline Bruschi; Carrilho, Marcela Rocha de Oliveira; Anauate Netto, Camillo; Sinhoreti, Mário Alexandre Coelho; Goes, Mario Fernando de.
  • Hipólito, Vinicius Di; Bandeirante University of São Paulo. Dental School. São Paulo. BR
  • Alonso, Roberta Caroline Bruschi; Bandeirante University of São Paulo. Dental School. São Paulo. BR
  • Carrilho, Marcela Rocha de Oliveira; Bandeirante University of São Paulo. Dental School. São Paulo. BR
  • Anauate Netto, Camillo; Bandeirante University of São Paulo. Dental School. São Paulo. BR
  • Sinhoreti, Mário Alexandre Coelho; University of Campinas. Piracicaba Dental School. Department of Restorative Dentistry. Piracicaba. BR
  • Goes, Mario Fernando de; University of Campinas. Piracicaba Dental School. Department of Restorative Dentistry. Piracicaba. BR
Braz. dent. j ; 22(2): 122-128, 2011. ilus, graf, tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-583800
ABSTRACT
This study evaluated the bonding characteristics to ground and unground enamel obtained with different strategies. For this purpose, 24 sound third-molars were bisected mesiodistally to obtain tooth halves. A flat enamel area was delimited in the tooth sections, which were randomly distributed into 8 groups (n=6), according to the enamel condition (ground and unground) and adhesive system (Adper Single Bond 2 - SB2; Adper Prompt L-Pop - PLP; Adper Prompt - AD; Clearfil SE Bond - SE). Each system was applied according manufacturers' instructions and a 6-mm-high resin composite "crown" was incrementally built up on bonded surfaces. Hourglass-shaped specimens with 0.8 mm² cross-section were produced. Microtensile bond strength (μTBS) was recorded and the failure patterns were classified. Results were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). There were no statistically significant differences among the μTBS values of SB2, PLP and AD (p>0.05). SE values were significantly lower (p0.05). There was prevalence of cohesive failure within enamel, adhesive system and resin composite for SB2. The self-etch systems produced higher incidence of cohesive failures in the adhesive system. Enamel condition did not determine significant differences on bonding characteristics for the same bonding system. In conclusion, the bonding systems evaluated in this study resulted in specific μTBS and failure patterns due to the particular interaction with enamel.
RESUMO
Este estudo avaliou a união ao esmalte íntegro e desgastado obtida com diferentes estratégias. Para tanto, 24 terceiros molares hígidos foram seccionados ao meio. Um plano de esmalte foi delimitado nos fragmentos de dente, aleatoriamente distribuídos em 8 grupos (n=6) conforme a condição do esmalte (íntegro ou desgastado) e o adesivo (Adper Single Bond 2 SB2; Adper Prompt L-Pop PLP; Adper Prompt AD; Clearfil SE Bond SE). Estes foram aplicados seguindo recomendações dos fabricantes e uma "coroa" de compósito (altura - 6 mm) incrementalmente construída. Espécimes (ampulheta/secção transversal - 0,8 mm²) foram confeccionados. O ensaio de resistência da união à micro-tração (RUµT) foi realizado e os padrões de fratura classificadas. Os resultados analisados pela ANOVA (dois fatores) e teste de Tukey (α=0,05). Os valores de RUµT do SB2, PLP e AD não foram significativamente diferentes entre si (p>0,05); SE foi inferior (p0,05). Houve prevalência de fratura no esmalte, adesivo e compósito no SB2. Nos adesivos autocondicionantes, predominou a fratura no adesivo. A condição do esmalte não influenciou significativamente as características da união, considerando o mesmo adesivo. Em conclusão, os adesivos apresentaram RUµT e padrões de fratura específicos, devido a forma de interação com o esmalte.
Subject(s)


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Dental Bonding / Smear Layer / Resin Cements / Dental Enamel Type of study: Controlled clinical trial / Risk factors Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Braz. dent. j Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2011 Type: Article / Project document Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Bandeirante University of São Paulo/BR / University of Campinas/BR

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Dental Bonding / Smear Layer / Resin Cements / Dental Enamel Type of study: Controlled clinical trial / Risk factors Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Braz. dent. j Journal subject: Dentistry Year: 2011 Type: Article / Project document Affiliation country: Brazil Institution/Affiliation country: Bandeirante University of São Paulo/BR / University of Campinas/BR