Literature DB >> 15668328

A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results.

J De Munck1, K Van Landuyt, M Peumans, A Poitevin, P Lambrechts, M Braem, B Van Meerbeek.   

Abstract

The immediate bonding effectiveness of contemporary adhesives is quite favorable, regardless of the approach used. In the long term, the bonding effectiveness of some adhesives drops dramatically, whereas the bond strengths of other adhesives are more stable. This review examines the fundamental processes that cause the adhesion of biomaterials to enamel and dentin to degrade with time. Non-carious class V clinical trials remain the ultimate test method for the assessment of bonding effectiveness, but in addition to being high-cost, they are time- and labor-consuming, and they provide little information on the true cause of clinical failure. Therefore, several laboratory protocols were developed to predict bond durability. This paper critically appraises methodologies that focus on chemical degradation patterns of hydrolysis and elution of interface components, as well as mechanically oriented test set-ups, such as fatigue and fracture toughness measurements. A correlation of in vitro and in vivo data revealed that, currently, the most validated method to assess adhesion durability involves aging of micro-specimens of biomaterials bonded to either enamel or dentin. After about 3 months, all classes of adhesives exhibited mechanical and morphological evidence of degradation that resembles in vivo aging effects. A comparison of contemporary adhesives revealed that the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives remain the 'gold standard' in terms of durability. Any kind of simplification in the clinical application procedure results in loss of bonding effectiveness. Only the two-step self-etch adhesives approach the gold standard and do have some additional clinical benefits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15668328     DOI: 10.1177/154405910508400204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent Res        ISSN: 0022-0345            Impact factor:   6.116


  311 in total

1.  A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Fábio Herrmann Coelho-De-Souza; Junara Cristina Camargo; Tiago Beskow; Matheus Dalmolin Balestrin; Celso Afonso Klein-Júnior; Flávio Fernando Demarco
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.698

2.  The competition between enamel and dentin adhesion within a cavity: an in vitro evaluation of class V restorations.

Authors:  Tissiana Bortolotto; Wassila Doudou; Karl Heinz Kunzelmann; Ivo Krejci
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Dentin infiltration ability of different classes of adhesive systems.

Authors:  Alina Langer; Nicoleta Ilie
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-02-29       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  24-month clinical evaluation in non-carious cervical lesions of a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive applied using a rubbing motion.

Authors:  Alessandro D Loguercio; Jovani Raffo; Fabrício Bassani; Heloiza Balestrini; Dalvan Santo; Roberto César do Amaral; Alessandra Reis
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  A 13-year clinical evaluation of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious class-V lesions.

Authors:  Marleen Peumans; Jan De Munck; Kirsten L Van Landuyt; Andre Poitevin; Paul Lambrechts; Bart Van Meerbeek
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Effect of Saliva on the Tensile Bond Strength of Different Generation Adhesive Systems: An In-Vitro Study.

Authors:  Nimisha Gupta; Abhay Mani Tripathi; Sonali Saha; Kavita Dhinsa; Aarti Garg
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-07-01

7.  Bond durability of universal adhesive to bovine enamel using self-etch mode.

Authors:  Soshi Suzuki; Toshiki Takamizawa; Arisa Imai; Akimasa Tsujimoto; Keiichi Sai; Masayuki Takimoto; Wayne W Barkmeier; Mark A Latta; Masashi Miyazaki
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 3.573

8.  Five-year clinical performance of a silorane- vs a methacrylate-based composite combined with two different adhesive approaches.

Authors:  Bruno Baracco; M Victoria Fuentes; Laura Ceballos
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Can 1% chlorhexidine diacetate and ethanol stabilize resin-dentin bonds?

Authors:  Adriana Pigozzo Manso; Rosa Helena Miranda Grande; Ana Karina Bedran-Russo; Alessandra Reis; Alessandro D Loguercio; David Henry Pashley; Ricardo Marins Carvalho
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 5.304

10.  Durability of self-healing dental composites: A comparison of performance under monotonic and cyclic loading.

Authors:  Mobin Yahyazadehfar; George Huyang; Xiaohong Wang; Yuwei Fan; Dwayne Arola; Jirun Sun
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 7.328

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.