Juliana Bomfigli Tranquilin1, Enrico Coser Bridi2, Flávia Lucisano Botelho Amaral3, Fabiana Mantovani Gomes França4, Cecilia Pedroso Turssi5, Roberta Tarkany Basting6. 1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. julianatranquilin@gmail.com. 2. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. enricobridi@gmail.com. 3. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. flbamaral@gmail.com. 4. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. biagomes@yahoo.com. 5. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. cecilia.turssi@gmail.com. 6. Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Leopoldo Mandic Institute and Research Center, Rua José Rocha Junqueira, 13, Campinas, 13045-755, São Paulo, Brazil. rbasting@yahoo.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the bond strength of a two-step conventional adhesive system to dentin pretreated with 2.5 % titanium tetrafluoride (TiF(4)) according to application timing (before or after acid conditioning) and primer/adhesive application method (active or passive). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentin surfaces were randomly treated with different adhesive procedures (n = 6): etching with phosphoric acid (PA) + primer/adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2/3M ESPE) actively applied; PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; and TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive passively applied. A composite block was built onto the tooth, which was sectioned into sticks (adhesive area of approximately 1 mm(2)). Microtensile bond strength tests and the failure mode were determined. RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between TiF(4) application timing and primer/adhesive application method (p = 0.184). The use of TiF(4), before or after PA significantly increased bond strength values (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in bond strength values when using TiF4 before or after PA. The primer/adhesive application method had no influence on bond strength, regardless of whether TiF(4) was used (p = 0.906). Failure mode was predominantly adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TiF(4) promoted higher immediate bond strength to dentin. The conventional adhesive system may be applied either actively or passively, regardless of TiF(4) application timing. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pretreatment with TiF(4) increased bond strength in a conventional two-step adhesive system to dentin, regardless of the primer/adhesive application method and the timing of dentin pretreatment.
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the bond strength of a two-step conventional adhesive system to dentin pretreated with 2.5 % titanium tetrafluoride (TiF(4)) according to application timing (before or after acid conditioning) and primer/adhesive application method (active or passive). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dentin surfaces were randomly treated with different adhesive procedures (n = 6): etching with phosphoric acid (PA) + primer/adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2/3M ESPE) actively applied; PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; TiF(4) before PA + primer/adhesive passively applied; TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive actively applied; and TiF(4) after PA + primer/adhesive passively applied. A composite block was built onto the tooth, which was sectioned into sticks (adhesive area of approximately 1 mm(2)). Microtensile bond strength tests and the failure mode were determined. RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between TiF(4) application timing and primer/adhesive application method (p = 0.184). The use of TiF(4), before or after PA significantly increased bond strength values (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in bond strength values when using TiF4 before or after PA. The primer/adhesive application method had no influence on bond strength, regardless of whether TiF(4) was used (p = 0.906). Failure mode was predominantly adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TiF(4) promoted higher immediate bond strength to dentin. The conventional adhesive system may be applied either actively or passively, regardless of TiF(4) application timing. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Pretreatment with TiF(4) increased bond strength in a conventional two-step adhesive system to dentin, regardless of the primer/adhesive application method and the timing of dentin pretreatment.
Entities:
Keywords:
Hybrid layer; Microtensile bond strength; Titanium tetrafluoride; Two-step conventional adhesive system
Authors: M Hashimoto; J De Munck; S Ito; H Sano; M Kaga; H Oguchi; B Van Meerbeek; D H Pashley Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Karen Dal-Bianco; Arlete Pellizzaro; Rafael Patzlaft; José Roberto de Oliveira Bauer; Alessandro Dourado Loguercio; Alessandra Reis Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2006-01-06 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Ana Karina B Bedran-Russo; David H Pashley; Kelli Agee; James L Drummond; Klaus J Miescke Journal: J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.368