BACKGROUND: Little information is available regarding the bonding performance of adhesive restorative materials to caries-affected dentine after the use of Carisolv. The aim of this study was to compare the microtensile bond strengths of two resin-based adhesives, a conventional glass ionomer cement and resin modified glass ionomer cement to 'normal' dentine and caries-affected dentine after Carisolv treatment. METHODS: Specimens were prepared using molar teeth with small carious lesions. Caries was removed with the Carisolv solution and the whole surface was bonded with either SE Bond, One Coat Bond, Fuji IX or Fuji II LC. After 24 hours, specimens were prepared for the microtensile bond strength test and stressed in tension at 1 mm/min until rupture of the bond. Mean bond strengths and mode of failure were determined and analysed with the LSD test and chi square test respectively. RESULTS: The results showed no statistical difference for SE Bond, One Coat Bond or Fuji IX, but a difference was observed for the resin-modified GIC, Fuji II LC. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that carious dentine treated with Carisolv did not affect the adhesion of the adhesive restorative materials tested in this study with the exception of Fuji II LC.
BACKGROUND: Little information is available regarding the bonding performance of adhesive restorative materials to caries-affected dentine after the use of Carisolv. The aim of this study was to compare the microtensile bond strengths of two resin-based adhesives, a conventional glass ionomer cement and resin modified glass ionomer cement to 'normal' dentine and caries-affected dentine after Carisolv treatment. METHODS: Specimens were prepared using molar teeth with small carious lesions. Caries was removed with the Carisolv solution and the whole surface was bonded with either SE Bond, One Coat Bond, Fuji IX or Fuji II LC. After 24 hours, specimens were prepared for the microtensile bond strength test and stressed in tension at 1 mm/min until rupture of the bond. Mean bond strengths and mode of failure were determined and analysed with the LSD test and chi square test respectively. RESULTS: The results showed no statistical difference for SE Bond, One Coat Bond or Fuji IX, but a difference was observed for the resin-modified GIC, Fuji II LC. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that carious dentine treated with Carisolv did not affect the adhesion of the adhesive restorative materials tested in this study with the exception of Fuji II LC.