Effect of cariogenic challenge on bond strength of adhesive systems to sound and demineralized primary and permanent enamel.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of cariogenic challenge on the bond strength of adhesive systems to sound and artificially demineralized enamel of primary and permanent teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty molars (40 primary, 40 permanent) were randomly assigned to 16 groups (n = 5) according to the type of tooth (primary [PRIM] or permanent [PERM]), enamel condition (sound [S] or demineralized [DEM]), treatment after the restorative procedure (control [C] or cariogenic challenge [pH]), and adhesive system (Adper Single Bond [SB] or Clearfil SE Bond [SE]). Teeth from the DEM group were subjected to cariogenic challenge by pH cycling prior to restorative procedures and pH group specimens were subjected to cariogenic challenge before the microshear test. One of two adhesive systems was applied to the flat enamel surfaces and composite cylinders (0.45 mm2) were built. The microshear bond test was performed. The data (MPa) were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were detected between the adhesive systems. The S groups exhibited higher bond strength values than the DEM groups, as did C groups compared to pH groups. PERM groups also had higher bond strength values than PRIM groups, excluding PRIM S and PERM S, which had similar values. CONCLUSION: The bond strength to demineralized enamel of primary teeth was lower than to the demineralized enamel of permanent teeth. Cariogenic challenge negatively influenced enamel bond strength, regardless of the type of tooth and adhesive system.

Conditioning effect on dentin, resin tags and hybrid layer of different acidity self-etch adhesives applied to thick and thin smear layer.

OBJECTIVES: to assess the conditioning effect (CE) of self-etch adhesives of different acidity applied to thick and thin smear layer (SL), the corresponding resin tags (RT) and hybrid layer (HL). METHODS: Twenty-seven molars had their occlusal dentin exposed and were sectioned into two halves. Each of them was ground with a 60 or 600-grit SiC paper, respectively for thick and thin SL production. Three self-etch adhesives: a mild (Clearfil SE Bond), an intermediary (Optibond Solo SE and Solo Plus) and a strong (Tyrian Self Priming Etchant+One Step Plus) and an etch-&-rinse system (Scotchbond Multi Purpose Plus) were used. For CE evaluation, the self-etch primers were applied and rinsed off with acetone and alcohol prior to SEM preparation. For RT and HL specimens self-etch adhesives were applied and restored with Z-250. For RT specimens, dentin was removed with HCl (6N) and NaClO (1%) baths. The HL specimens were fixed, dehydrated, dried with HMDS, embedded, polished and slightly demineralized (6N HCl) and deproteinized (1% NaClO). After gold sputtering they were observed by SEM. RESULTS: The thick smear layer was clearly not totally removed by the mild self-etch primer. RT varied in density and shape among the self-etch adhesives. Thicker HL was observed for the strong self-etch and etch-&-rinse adhesives. CONCLUSIONS: The etch-&-rinse adhesive presented the thickest HL and was the only adhesive to produce RT in high density and uniform distribution along the whole dentin surface, independently of the SL thickness.

Effect of smear layer thickness and pH of self-etching adhesive systems on the bond strength and gap formation to dentin.

PURPOSE: To measure the buffering capacity of self-etching adhesive systems and to evaluate the effect of smear layer thickness on the mean gap width (GW) and microtensile bond strength (microBS) to dentin of these self-etching adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clearfil SE Bond (SE), Optibond Solo Plus Self-Etch Primer + Optibond Solo Plus (SO), Tyrian Self Priming Etchant + One Step Plus (TY) and as controls, Single Bond (SB) and ScotchBond Multi-Purpose Plus (SC) were used with Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative. The self-etching primers and 35% phosphoric acid (0.5 ml) were titrated by adding successive 0.05 ml drops of NaOH (1N). Thirty molars (n = 5) were sectioned in halves upon which thick (60-grit SiC) and thin (600-grit SiC) smear layer surfaces were produced. The adhesive application was randomized (n = 6) and a resin buildup was made. After 24 h, the resin-dentin sticks (0.8 mm2) were prepared. The GW on the sticks was measured at 400X magnification before the microtensile test (0.5 mm/min). The microtensile bond strength index was calculated including the relative failure type contribution. Data were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison. Simple linear regression was performed to determine whether correlation existed between microBS and pH, GW and pH, and microBS and GW. RESULTS: Only the factor "adhesive" significantly effected microBS (p = 0.001). TY had the lowest microBS values. Regarding GW, both main factors adhesive (p = 0.0001) and smear layer thickness (p = 0.03) were significant. The highest mean gap width was observed for SE and under a thick smear layer. A linear relationship was observed between the pH and GW and pH and microBS; however, a significant positive correlation was detected only between pH and GW (R = 0.99, p = 0.02). No relationship between microBS and GW was found (R = 0.04, p = 0.77). CONCLUSION: Although the smear layer thickness had no effect on resin-dentin bond strength, thick smear layers adversely affected the mean gap width. The microBS values were not affected by the acidity of self-etching primers; however, more aggressive self-etching primers showed the lowest mean gap width. The etch-and-rinse adhesive systems showed higher microBS and lower mean gap widths.

Expansion of high flow mixtures of gypsum-bonded investments in contact with absorbent liners.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the expansion of high flow mixtures of gypsum-bonded investments in contact with two dry absorbent liners since early setting. METHODS: Cristobalite-Dentsply and Cristobalite-Polidental gypsum-bonded investments were tested under 10 setting conditions (n=4): Normal and Hygroscopic (controls); four conditions of 'Dry-Lining' (set in contact with 3 different amounts of dry cellulose liner: 0.2, 0.4 or 0.8 g and with 0.1 g of a granulated Super Absorbent polymer liner) and four conditions of 'Dry-Lining with hygroscopic expansion' (initially setting in contact with dry absorbents, as 'Dry-Lining' conditions, followed by water immersion immediately after loss of gloss). The percent of expansion at 2h was analyzed. RESULTS: The 'Dry-Lining' condition, with 0.4 and 0.8 g of cellulose, for brand Dentsply (1.41+/-0.13 and 1.42+/-0.16) and Polidental (1.14+/-0.17 and 1.01+/-0.22) allowed a significant higher expansion than the controls Normal (Dentsply=0.30+/-0.04, Polidental=0.31+/-0.05) (P<0.05). The 'Dry-Lining with hygroscopic expansion' condition with 0.8 g of cellulose expanded significantly more (3.57+/-0.55) than the control Hygroscopic (2.63+/-0.31) in brand Dentsply (P<0.05). Super Absorbent did not produce different expansion (Dentsply=0.86+/-0.02, Polidental=0.79+/-0.18) than the controls Normal and Hygroscopic (Dentsply=2.93+/-0.17, Polidental=2.12+/-0.40). SIGNIFICANCE: The water removal with dry cellulose absorbent liner before loss of gloss increased the potential of setting expansion for Normal and Hygroscopic conditions. Thus, when using high fluid mixtures, which are more desirable for investment pouring, it will be possible to obtain enough setting expansion potential in order to adequately compensate for wax and alloy shrinkage in the casting process.