4.1 Article

Enamel Bond Strength of New Universal Adhesive Bonding Agents

Journal

OPERATIVE DENTISTRY
Volume 40, Issue 4, Pages 410-417

Publisher

OPERATIVE DENTISTRY INC
DOI: 10.2341/13-287-L

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. 59th Clinical Research Training Division, Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland, TX

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Universal bonding agents have been introduced for use as self-etch or etch-andrinse adhesives depending on the dental substrate and clinician's preference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of composite to enamel using universal adhesives compared to a self-etch adhesive when applied in self-etch and etchand- rinse modes over time. Methods and Materials: Extracted human third molars were used to create 120 enamel specimens. The specimens were ground flat and randomly divided into three groups: two universal adhesives and one self-etch adhesive. Each group was then subdivided, with half the specimens bonded in self-etch mode and half in etch-and-rinse mode. The adhesives were applied as per manufacturers' instructions, and composite was bonded using a standardized mold and cured incrementally. The groups were further divided into two subgroups with 10 specimens each. One subgroup was stored for 24 hours and the second for six months in 37 degrees C distilled water and tested in shear. Failure mode was also determined for each specimen. Results: A three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) found a significant difference between groups based on bonding agent (p<0.001) and surface treatment (p<0.001) but not on time (p=0.943), with no significant interaction (p>0.05). Clearfil SE in etch-and-rinse and selfetch modes had more mixed fractures than either universal adhesive in either mode. Conclusions: Etching enamel significantly increased the SBS of composite to enamel. Clearfil SE had significantly greater bond strength to enamel than either universal adhesive, which were not significantly different fromeach other.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available