Hakan Çolak1, Uğur Tokay2, Recep Uzgur3, Zeynep Uzgur3, Ertuğrul Ercan4, Mehmet M Hamidi4. 1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Zirve University, Gaziantep - Turkey. 2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Zirve University, Gaziantep - Turkey. 3. Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zirve University, Gaziantep - Turkey. 4. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Kirikkale University, Kirikkale - Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of 3 different adhesives with different functional monomers, on the shear bond strength (SBS) of Biodentine®. METHODS: Acrylic blocks (n = 90) were prepared and a 2-mm height x 4-mm diameter hole was opened in each block. Every hole was completely restored with Biodentine®. Before preparation of composite restorations over the Biodentine® (2-mm height x 2-mm diameter), 3 different adhesives (Etch-37 (37%) w/BAC by Bisco & Prime Bond N&T, Clearfil S3 Bond and Adper Prompt L-Pop) were applied. SBS was evaluated using a universal testing machine, and failure mode for each sample was recorded. The results were statistically analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. RESULTS: When the megapascal values of all groups were compared, although there was no statistically significant difference in the different setting times (p>0.05), statistically significant differences were observed among all adhesive groups (p<0.05). Moreover, the highest SBS values were observed in the Clearfil S3 Bond group. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical performance of Biodentine® may be affected by adhesive procedures and its setting time.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of 3 different adhesives with different functional monomers, on the shear bond strength (SBS) of Biodentine®. METHODS: Acrylic blocks (n = 90) were prepared and a 2-mm height x 4-mm diameter hole was opened in each block. Every hole was completely restored with Biodentine®. Before preparation of composite restorations over the Biodentine® (2-mm height x 2-mm diameter), 3 different adhesives (Etch-37 (37%) w/BAC by Bisco & Prime Bond N&T, Clearfil S3 Bond and Adper Prompt L-Pop) were applied. SBS was evaluated using a universal testing machine, and failure mode for each sample was recorded. The results were statistically analyzed using 2-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. RESULTS: When the megapascal values of all groups were compared, although there was no statistically significant difference in the different setting times (p&gt;0.05), statistically significant differences were observed among all adhesive groups (p&lt;0.05). Moreover, the highest SBS values were observed in the Clearfil S3 Bond group. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical performance of Biodentine® may be affected by adhesive procedures and its setting time.