ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare the effect of active pre-conditioning with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) vs 37% phosphoric acid (PA) on the resin-enamel microshear bond strength (µSBS), enamel-etching pattern, and in situ degree of conversion (in situ DC) of four universal adhesives on sound and fluorotic enamel. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, 448 extracted human molars (224 without fluorosis and 224 with fluorosis) were sectioned into four parts and divided into 16 experimental groups based on the enamel surface (sound or fluorotic enamel), adhesive (Clearfil Universal Bond [CUB], Futurabond U [FBU], iBond Universal [IBU], or Scotchbond Universal [SBU]), and enamel conditioning agent (PA or EDTA). The specimens were stored for 24 h and tested under shear stress at 1.0 mm/min to determine the µSBS. The adhesive-enamel interfaces were evaluated for in situ DC using micro-Raman spectroscopy. The enamel-etching pattern was evaluated using a scanning electron microscope. The µSBS and in situ DC data were analyzed separately using three-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test (a = 0.05). RESULTS: Sound enamel showed higher µSBS and in situ DC compared to fluorotic enamel (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed for µSBS, in situ DC (p > 0.05), or etching patterns when PA and EDTA etching were compared in sound and fluorotic enamel. Moreover, CUB and SBU showed higher mean µSBS than did FBU and IBU in both sound and fluorotic enamel (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to PA, active pre-conditioning with EDTA showed similar µSBS and enamel etching patterns for all the adhesives in fluorotic enamel, without compromising the in situ DC.
Subject(s)
Dental Bonding , Adhesives/analysis , Adhesives/pharmacology , Dental Bonding/methods , Dental Cements/chemistry , Dental Enamel , Edetic Acid , Humans , Materials Testing , Resin Cements/chemistry , Shear Strength , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
The objective of this study is to compare the resin-enamel bond strength (mµSBS), in-situ degree of conversion (DC), and the enamel-etching pattern (SEM/EDX) of universal adhesive systems when applied to sound and fluorotic enamel. Ninety-eight human molars were sectioned into 4 parts and divided into 24 groups according to 1) enamel surface (sound or fluorotic enamel), 2) adhesive system (Clearfil Universal Bond [CUB], Futurabond U [FBU], iBond Universal [IBU], and Scotchbond Universal [SBU]), and 3) application mode (etch-and-rinse [ER], active self-etch [Active-SE], and passive self-etch [Passive-SE]). Specimens were stored at 37 °C, for 24 hours and tested at 1.0 mm/min (µSBS). Enamel-resin interfaces were evaluated for in-situ DC. The enamel-etching pattern was evaluated under a SEM/EDX. Data from mµSBS and in-situ DC was analyzed using a three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5 % level of significance. For all adhesives, the ER resulted in a statistically significant higher mean mµSBS than the passive-SE in both substrates (p < 0.001). For all adhesives, active-SE resulted in mean mµSBS (p > 0.31) and in-situ DC (p > 0.45) that were statistically similar to those obtained with the ERs in both substrates. A statistically significant, higher mean mµSBS and in-situ DC were obtained in sound enamel (p < 0.001) than in fluorotic enamel. In general, SBU showed higher mean values for mµSBS and in-situ DC compared to those of CUB and IBU (p < 0.001). ER and active-SE showed the deepest enamel-etching pattern in both substrates. A higher amount of fluor was observed in fluorotic enamel. The active application of universal adhesives in the SE-mode may be a viable alternative to increase the adhesive properties in sound and fluorotic enamel.
