PURPOSE: To measure the microtensile bond strength of different pit and fissure sealants in a simplified fissure model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty extracted bovine mandibular permanent incisors were randomly divided into 4 groups for treatment: G1: 35% phosphoric acid/Clinpro Sealant; G2: 35% phosphoric acid/Delton; G3: Non-Rinse Conditioner/Dyract Seal; G4: 20% polyacrylic acid/Fuji IILC. Each tooth was sectioned into 6 pieces (4 x 6 mm) of buccal enamel. SEM examination was used to confirm the presence of aprismatic enamel on each tooth. Using a spacer, two pieces of etched enamel were secured to a glass slide at a mean distance of 0.6+/-0.1 mm. The space between enamel substrates was then etched/conditioned and sealed with different materials according to the tested groups. By serially cutting each double-bonded sample, multiple beam-shaped specimens about 0.8mm(2) in cross section were obtained and tested in tension (0.5 mm/min) until failure occurred at either one of the two stressed interfaces. Failure modes were classified by stereomicroscopy. RESULTS: G1 and G2 showed statistically higher bond strengths than G3 and G4. G4 demonstrated the significantly lowest bond strength. Failures were mostly adhesive in G1, G2, G3, and mainly cohesive/mixed in G4. CONCLUSION: According to this model, resin-based materials (Clinpro Sealant, Delton) showed better microtensile bond strength than compomer (Dyract Seal) or resin-modified glass ionomer (Fuji IILC).
PURPOSE: To measure the microtensile bond strength of different pit and fissure sealants in a simplified fissure model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty extracted bovine mandibular permanent incisors were randomly divided into 4 groups for treatment: G1: 35% phosphoric acid/Clinpro Sealant; G2: 35% phosphoric acid/Delton; G3: Non-Rinse Conditioner/Dyract Seal; G4: 20% polyacrylic acid/Fuji IILC. Each tooth was sectioned into 6 pieces (4 x 6 mm) of buccal enamel. SEM examination was used to confirm the presence of aprismatic enamel on each tooth. Using a spacer, two pieces of etched enamel were secured to a glass slide at a mean distance of 0.6+/-0.1 mm. The space between enamel substrates was then etched/conditioned and sealed with different materials according to the tested groups. By serially cutting each double-bonded sample, multiple beam-shaped specimens about 0.8mm(2) in cross section were obtained and tested in tension (0.5 mm/min) until failure occurred at either one of the two stressed interfaces. Failure modes were classified by stereomicroscopy. RESULTS: G1 and G2 showed statistically higher bond strengths than G3 and G4. G4 demonstrated the significantly lowest bond strength. Failures were mostly adhesive in G1, G2, G3, and mainly cohesive/mixed in G4. CONCLUSION: According to this model, resin-based materials (Clinpro Sealant, Delton) showed better microtensile bond strength than compomer (Dyract Seal) or resin-modified glass ionomer (Fuji IILC).