PURPOSE: To measure the microtensile bond strength to enamel and dentin of three self-etching adhesives in comparison with a total-etch two-step system as a control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 extracted human molars were stored in saline solution until use, then divided into 4 groups of 10 teeth (one group per adhesive system). Half of each of these groups underwent bond strength tests on enamel, and the other half was used for adhesion testing on dentin. The following experimental groups (n = 5) were then formed: E(1) Adper Prompt-L-Pop (AP, 3M ESPE) on enamel; E(2) Xeno CF II (X, Sanking Kogyo) on enamel; E(3) AdheSE (AS, Ivoclar-Vivadent) on enamel; E(4) Excite (EX, Ivoclar-Vivadent) on enamel; D(1) AP on dentin; D(2): X on dentin; D(3) AS on dentin; D(4) EX on dentin. Each tooth yielded 15 to 20 sticks about 0.9 x 0.9 mm in cross-sectional area for microtensile testing. Specimens were loaded in tension at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute, and bond strength at failure was calculated in MPa. A two-way ANOVA was applied to test for significance of the differences among the groups. RESULTS: The bond strength values of Excite (the control) were significantly higher than those of the test products on enamel (42.92+/-4.8 MPa) and on dentin (45.80+/-5.79 MPa). The self-etching adhesives AdheSE (28.48+/-4.71 MPa) and Xeno CF II (27.22+/-2.74 MPa) revealed significantly stronger adhesion than Adper Prompt-L-Pop (20.16+/-2.07 MPa) on dentin. On enamel, all self-etching test materials performed similarly. The substrate did not appear to have a significant influence on adhesion, as each material reached comparable levels of bond strength on enamel and dentin. CONCLUSION: On both substrates the self-etching adhesives tested performed significantly worse than did the total-etch system.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To measure the microtensile bond strength to enamel and dentin of three self-etching adhesives in comparison with a total-etch two-step system as a control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 extracted human molars were stored in saline solution until use, then divided into 4 groups of 10 teeth (one group per adhesive system). Half of each of these groups underwent bond strength tests on enamel, and the other half was used for adhesion testing on dentin. The following experimental groups (n = 5) were then formed: E(1) Adper Prompt-L-Pop (AP, 3M ESPE) on enamel; E(2) Xeno CF II (X, Sanking Kogyo) on enamel; E(3) AdheSE (AS, Ivoclar-Vivadent) on enamel; E(4) Excite (EX, Ivoclar-Vivadent) on enamel; D(1) AP on dentin; D(2): X on dentin; D(3) AS on dentin; D(4) EX on dentin. Each tooth yielded 15 to 20 sticks about 0.9 x 0.9 mm in cross-sectional area for microtensile testing. Specimens were loaded in tension at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute, and bond strength at failure was calculated in MPa. A two-way ANOVA was applied to test for significance of the differences among the groups. RESULTS: The bond strength values of Excite (the control) were significantly higher than those of the test products on enamel (42.92+/-4.8 MPa) and on dentin (45.80+/-5.79 MPa). The self-etching adhesives AdheSE (28.48+/-4.71 MPa) and Xeno CF II (27.22+/-2.74 MPa) revealed significantly stronger adhesion than Adper Prompt-L-Pop (20.16+/-2.07 MPa) on dentin. On enamel, all self-etching test materials performed similarly. The substrate did not appear to have a significant influence on adhesion, as each material reached comparable levels of bond strength on enamel and dentin. CONCLUSION: On both substrates the self-etching adhesives tested performed significantly worse than did the total-etch system.
Authors: Leili Sadaghiani; Abdullah M Alshumrani; Hannah B Gleeson; Wayne Nishio Ayre; Alastair J Sloan Journal: Int Endod J Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 5.165