THE EFFECT OF MULTIPLE APPLICATION ON MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH OF ALL-IN-ONE DENTIN ADHESIVE SYSTEMS

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2004;29(5):423-429

Publication date (electronic) : 2004 January 14

doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.5.423

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University

^*Corresponding author: Sung-Ae Son, Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Pusan National University 1-10 Ami-dong, Seo-gu, Pusan, Korea, 602-739, Tel : 82-51-240-7454, E-mail: song-ae@hanmail.net

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of multiple application of all-in-one dentin adhesive system on microtensile bond strength using confocal laser scanning microscope and microtensile bond strength test. Flat occlusal dentin surfaces were prepared using low-speed diamond saw. In group I, Scotchbond Multipurpose (SM) was applied by manufacturer’s recommendation. In group II, after Adper Prompt L-Pop was applied for 15s and light cured for 10s, the second coat was re-applied and light-cured. In group III, after light-curing the second layer, the third coat was re-applied and light-cured. Specimens bonded with a resin-composite were sectioned into resin-dentin stick for measuring the adhesive layer thickness by confocal laser scanning microscope and evaluating micro-tensile bond strength. The adhesive layers of three-step dentin adhesive system, 3 coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop had significantly thicker than SM, 2 coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant differences in bond strengths between SM and 3 coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop (p > 0.05). And SM, 3 coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop had significantly higher than 2 coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop in bond strengths (p < 0.05).

Keywords: All-in-one dentin adhesive; Micro-tensile bond strength; Confocal laser scanning microscope

Figure 1.

Confocal micrograph of specimen prepared with Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. The adhesive layer appeared by red color, is continuous across the interface.

Figure 2.

Confocal micrograph of specimen prepared with two application of Adper Prompt L-Pop. The adhesive layer is appeared by red color.

Figure 3.

Confocal micrograph of specimen prepared with three application of Adper Prompt L-Pop. It provides a more thick adheisve interface than 2coats of Adper Prompt L-Pop.

Table 1.

Dentin bonding system used in this study

Table 2.

Adhesive system tested in the study and application protocol

Table 3.

Thickness of adhesive layer (TAL) and micro-tensile bond strength (MTBS) (Mean ± SD)

References

1. Bounocore M. A Simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 34:849–853. 1955;

2. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Fatigue behaviour of different dentin adhesives. Clin Oral Investig 3:11–17. 1999;

3. Tay FR, Gwinnett JA, Wei SH. Micromorphological spectrum of acid-conditioned dentin following the application of a water-based adhesive. Dent Mater 14:329–338. 1998;

4. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentinal bonding. Quintessence Int 27:619–625. 1996;

5. Nakabayashi N. Resin reinforced dentin due to infiltration of monomers into the dentin adhesive interface. J Jpn Dent Mat Devices 1:78–81. 1982;

6. Perdigao J, Lopes M. Dentin bonding–questions for the new millennium. J Adhes Dent 1:191–209. 1999;

7. Gwinnett AJ. Moist versus dry dentin: its effect on shear bond strength. Am J Dent 5:127–129. 1992;

8. Kanca J. 3rd. Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 23:39–41. 1992;

9. Kanca J. 3rd. Effect of resin primer solvents and surface wetness on resin composite bond strength to dentin. Am J Dent 5:213–215. 1992;

10. Tanumiharja M, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems. Dent Mater 16:180–187. 2000;

11. Gwinnett AJ. Dentin bond strength after air drying and rewetting. Am J Dent 7:144–148. 1994;

12. Pashley EL, Agee KA, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Effects of one versus two applications of an unfilled, all-in-one adhesive on dentine bonding. J Dent 30:83–90. 2002;

13. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding:effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 25:324–330. 2000;

14. Frankenberger R, Perdigao J, Rosa BT, Lopes M. “No-bottle”vs“multi-bottle”dentin adhesives–a microten-sile bond strength and morphological study. Dent Mater 17:373–380. 2001;

15. Rosa BT, Perdigao J. Bond strengths of nonrinsing adhesives. Quintessence Int 31:353–358. 2000;

16. Blunck U, Roulet JF. Marginal adaptation of com-pomer Class V restorations in vitro. J Adhes Dent 1:143–151. 1999;

17. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Oberschachtsiek H, Petschelt A. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaption after NaOCl pre-treatment. Oper Dent 25:40–45. 2000;

18. Swift EJ Jr, Wilder AD Jr, May KN Jr, Waddell SL. Shear bond strengths of one-bottle dentin adhesives using multiple applications. Oper Dent 22:194–1999. 1997;

19. Fritz UB, Finger WJ. Bonding efficiency of single-bottle enamel/dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 12:277–282. 1999;

20. Bouillaguet S, Gysi P, Wataha JC, Ciucchi B, Cattani M, Godin C, Meyer JM. Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional, one-step, and self-etching adhesive systems. J Dent 29:55–61. 2001;

21. Platt JA, Almeida J, Gonzalez-Cabezas C, Rhodes B, Moore BK. The effect of double adhesive application on the shear bond strength to dentin of compomers using three one-bottle adhesive systems. Oper Dent 26:313–317. 2001;

22. Choi KK, Condon JR, Ferracane JL. The effects of adhesive thickness on polymerization contraction stress of composite. J Dent Res 79:812–817. 2000;

23. Krejci I, Kuster M, Lutz F. Influence of dentinal fluid and stress on marginal adaptation of resin composites. J Dent Res 72:490–494. 1993;

24. Duke ES. Adhesion and its application with restorative materials. Dent Clin North Am 37:329–340. 1993;

25. Feilzer AJ, De Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res 66:1636–1639. 1987;

26. Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Davidson CL. Stiffness increase during the setting of dental composite resins. J Dent Res 66:1713–1716. 1987;

27. Davidson CL, de Gee AJ, Feilzer A. The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res 63:1396–1399. 1984;

28. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Complete marginal seal of Class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res 69:1240–1243. 1990;

29. Zheng L, Pereira PN, Nakajima M, Sano H, Tagami J. Relationship between adhesive thickness and microten-sile bond strength. Oper Dent 26(1):97–104. 2001;

30. Sudsangiam S, van Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose? J Adhes Dent 1:57–67. 1999;

31. Van Meerbeek B, Willems G, Celis JP, Roos JR, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Assessment by nano-indentation of the hardness and elasticity of the resin-dentin bonding area. J Dent Res 72:1434–1442. 1993;

32. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Marginal integrity related to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems. J Prosthet Dent 64:658–664. 1990;

33. Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS. The effect of air thinning on dentin adhesive bond strength. Oper Dent 20:133–137. 1995;

34. Ai H, Nagai M. Effect of the adhesive layer thickness on the fracture toughness of dental adhesive resins. Dent Mater J 19:153–163. 2000;

35. Zheng L, Pereira PN, Nakajima M, Sano H, Tagami J. Relationship between adhesive thickness and microten-sile bond strength. Oper Dent 26:97–104. 2001;

36. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding:effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 25:324–330. 2000;

37. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentinal bonding. Quintessence Int 27:619–625. 1996;

38. Oysaed H, Ruyter IE, Sjovik Kleven IJ. Release of formaldehyde from dental composites. J Dent Res 67:1289–1294. 1988;

39. Ruyter IE. Unpolymerized surface layers on sealants. Acta Odontol Scand 39:27–32. 1981;

40. Ban S, Hasegawa J. Heat of polymerization of dimethacrylate monomers investigated by isothermal DSC measurement. Dent Mater 3:85–92. 1984;

41. Rueggeberg FA, Margeson DH. The effect of oxygen inhibition on an unfilled/filled composite system. J Dent Res 69:1652–658. 1990;

42. Perdigao J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Yildiz E, Yucel T, Vanherle G. The interaction of adhesive systems with human dentin. Am J Dent 9:167–173. 1996;

43. Causton BE, Sefton J. Some bonding characteristics of a HEMA/maleic acid adhesion promoter. Br Dent J 167:308–311. 1989;

Article information Continued

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.