Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-12.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems


Your browser does not support the NLM PubReader view.

Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.

Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2008;33(2):148-161
Publication date (electronic) : 2008 March 31
doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.2.148
Eun-Hwa Oh, Kyoung-Kyu Choi, Jong-Ryul Kim, Sang-Jin Park
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Division of Dentistry, Graduate of Kyung Hee University, Korea.
Corresponding Author: Sang-Jin Park. Professor of Division of Dentistry, Graduate School of KyungHee University, 1, Hoegi-Dong, Dongdaemun-Gu, Seoul 130-702, Korea. Tel: 82-2-958-9335, psangjin@khu.ac.kr
Received 2008 February 28; Revised 2008 March 07; Accepted 2008 March 10.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of chlorhexidine (CHX) on microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of dentin bonding systems.

Dentin collagenolytic and gelatinolytic activities can be suppressed by protease inhibitors, indicating that MMPs (Matrix metalloproteinases) inhibition could be beneficial in the preservation of hybrid layers. Chlorhexidine (CHX) is known as an inhibitor of MMPs activity in vitro.

The experiment was proceeded as follows:

At first, flat occlusal surfaces were prepared on mid-coronal dentin of extracted third molars. GI (Glass Ionomer) group was treated with dentin conditioner, and then, applied with 2% CHX. Both SM (Scotchbond Multipurpose) and SB (Single Bond) group were applied with CHX after acid-etched with 37% phosphoric acid. TS (Clearfil Tri-S) group was applied with CHX, and then, with adhesives. Hybrid composite Z-250 and resin-modified glass ionomer Fuji-II LC was built up on experimental dentin surfaces. Half of them were subjected to 10,000 thermocycle, while the others were tested immediately. With the resulting data, statistically two-way ANOVA was performed to assess the µTBS before and after thermocycling and the effect of CHX. All statistical tests were carried out at the 95% level of confidence. The failure mode of the testing samples was observed under a scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

Within limited results, the results of this study were as follows;

  1. In all experimental groups applied with 2% chlorhexidine, the microtensile bond strength increased, and thermocycling decreased the microtensile bond strength (P > 0.05).

  2. Compared to the thermocycling groups without chlorhexidine, those with both thermocycling and chlorhexidine showed higher microtensile bond strength, and there was significant difference especially in GI and TS groups.

  3. SEM analysis of failure mode distribution revealed the adhesive failure at hybrid layer in most of the specimen, and the shift of the failure site from bottom to top of the hybrid layer with chlorhexidine groups.

2% chlorhexidine application after acid-etching proved to preserve the durability of the hybrid layer and microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems.

Keywords: Chlorhexidine; Microtensile bond strength; Durability

References

1. Van Meerbeek B, Perdigao J, Lambrechts P. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent 1998. 261–20.
2. Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Sano H. In vitro degradation of resin-dentin bonds analyzed by microtensile bond test, scanning and transmission electron microscopy. Biomaterials 2003. 243795–3803.
3. Okuda M, Pereira PNR, Nakajima M. Long-term durability of resin dentin interface: nanoleakage vs microtensile bond strength. Oper Dent 2002. 27289–296.
4. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y. Four-year Water Degradation of Total-etch Adhesives Bonded to Dentin. J Dent Res 2003. 2136–140.
5. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Yiu C. Callagen Degradation by Host-derived Enzymes during Aging. J Dent Res 2004. 83216–221.
6. Gendron R, Grenier D, Sorsa T. Inhibition of the activities of matrix metalloproteinases 2, 8, and 9 by chlorhexidine. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 1999. 437–439.
7. Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Kaga M. In vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds in humans over 1 to 3 years. J Dent Res 2000. 791385–1391.
8. Chaussain-Miller C, Fioretti F, Goldberg M. The role of matrix metalloproteinases(MMPs) in Human Caries. J Dent Res 2006. 8522–32.
9. Sorsa T, Tjaderhane L, Salo T. Matrix metalloproteinases(MMPs) in oral disease. Oral Dis 2004. 10311–318.
10. Hebling J, Pashley DH, Tjaderhane L. Chlorhexidine arrests subclinical degradation of dentin hybrid layers in vivo. J Dent Res 2005. 84741–746.
11. Carrilho MR, Carvalho RM. Chlorhexidine preserves dentin bond in vitro. J Dent Res 2007. 8690–94.
12. Carrilho MR, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Mechnical stability of resin-dentin bond components. Dent Mater 2005. 21232–241.
13. Carrilho MR, Carvalho RM, Tay FR. Durability of resin-dentin bonds related to water and oil storage. Am J Dent 2005. 18315–319.
14. De Castro F, De Andrade M. Effect of 2% chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of composite to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2003. 5129–138.
15. Martin-De Las Heras S, Valenzuela A, Overall CM. The matrix metalloproteinases gelatinases A in human dentin. Arch Oral Biol 2000. 45757–765.
16. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 2005. 84118–132.
17. Nagase H, Visse R, Mruphy G. Structure and function of matrix metalloproteinases and TIMPs. Cardiovasc Res 2006. 69562–573.
18. Nishitani Y, Yoshiyama M, Wadgaonkar B. Activation of gelatinolytic/collagenolytic activity in dentin by self-etching adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci 2006. 114160–166.
19. Dumas J, Hurion N, Weill R. Collagenases in mineralized tissues of human teeth. FEBS Lett 1985. 18751–55.
20. Sulkala M, Wahlgren J, Larmas M. The effects of MMP inhibitors on human salivary MMP activity and caries progression in rat. J Dent Res 2001. 801545–1549.
21. Traderhane L, Larjava H, Sorsa T. The activation and function of host matrix metalloproteinases in dentin matrix breakdown in caries lesions. J Dent Res 1998. 771622–1629.
22. Van Strijp AJ, Van Steenbergen TJ, De Graaff J. Bacterial colonization and degradation of demineralized dentin matrix in situ. Caries Res 1994. 2821–27.
23. Van Strijp AJ, Van Steenbergen TJ, ten Cate JM. Bacterial colonization of mineralized and completely demineralized dentin in situ. Caries Res 1997. 31349–355.
24. Birkedal-Hansen H, Moore WG, Bodden MK. Matrix metalloproteinases: a review. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1993. 4197–250.
25. Bode W, Fernandez-Catalan C, Tschesche H. Structural properties of matrix metalloproteinases. Cell Mol Life Sci 1999. 55639–652.
26. Van Strijp AJ, Jansen DC, De Groot J. Host-derived proteinases and degradation of dentine collagen in situ. Caries Res 2003. 3758–65.
27. Brackett WW, Tay FR, Brackett MG. The effect of chlorhexidine on dentin hybrid layers in vivo. Oper Dent 2007. 32107–111.
28. Carrilho MR, Geraldeli S, Tay F. In vivo preservation of the hybrid layer by chlorhexidine. J Dent Res 2007. 86529–533.
29. Inoue S, Van Meerbeek B, Abe Y. Effect of remaining dentin thickness and the use of conditioner on microtensile bond strength of glass ionomer adhesive. Dent Mater 2001. 17445–455.
30. Lin A, Mclntyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on the adhesion of glass ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res 1992. 711836–1841.
31. Van Meerbeek B, Vargas S, Inoue S. Adhesives and cements to promote preservation dentistry. Oper Dent 2001. 26Suppl 6. S119–S144.
32. Yoshida Y, Van Meerbeek B, Nakayama Y. Evidence of chemical bonding at biomaterial-hard tissue interfaces. J Dent Res 2000. 79709–714.
33. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 1999. 2789–99.
34. Van Meerbeek B, Conn LJ Jr, Duke ES. Correlative transmission electron microscopy examination of nondemineralized and demineralized resin-dentin interfaces formed by two dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1996. 75879–888.
35. Eliades G, Vougiouklakis G, Palaghias G. Heterogenous distribution of single-bottle adhesive monomers in the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone. Dent Mater 2001. 17277–283.

Article information Continued

Copyright © 2008 Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
(open-access) :

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.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Diagram of experimental groups according to the modes of specimen treatments.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Specimen preparation for microtensile bond testing and thermocycling procedures.

Figure 3

Figure 3

The microtensile bond strength (MPa) with/without CHX and thermocycles (10,000 cycles).

Figure 4

Figure 4

SEM images of fractured surfaces after microtensile bond strength testing of SM.

(A) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (B) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (C) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 100) (D) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 2000) (E) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (F) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (G) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 100) (H) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 2000)

A,B show adhesive failure. C,D show adhesive failure at the bottom of hybrid layer and resin tag are broken or left out of dentinal tubules. E,F show adhesive failure at hybrid layer intertubular dentin seems to be completely covered by adhesive (DT: dentinal tubule, C: composite resin, HL: hybrid layer).

Figure 5

Figure 5

SEM images of fractured surfaces after microtensile bond strength testing of SB.

(A) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (B) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (C) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 100) (D) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 2000) (E) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (F) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (G) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 100) (H) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 2000)

A,B show adhesive failure at hybrid layer. C,D show mixed failure at the bottom of hybrid layer. G,H show mixed failure at top of the hybrid layer.(HL: hybrid layer, DT: dentinal tubule)

Figure 6

Figure 6

SEM images of fractured surfaces after microtensile bond strength testing of TS.

(A) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (B) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (C) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 100) (D) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 2000) (E) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (F) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (G) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 100) (H) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 2000)

G,H show the shift of the failure site from the bottom to the top of the hybrid layer. (DT: dentinal tubule, HL: hybrid layer, C: composite resin)

Figure 7

Figure 7

SEM images of fractured surfaces after microtensile bond strength testing of GI.

(A) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (B) No CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (C) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 100) (D) No CHX/10,000cycles (× 2000) (E) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 100) (F) CHX/No Thermocycle (× 2000) (G) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 100) (H) CHX/10,000 cycles (× 2000)

Table 1

Materials used in this study

Table 1

Table 2

Microtensile Bond Strengths (MPa, mean ± SD) of 16 Experimental Groups

Table 2

Different superscript letters were significantly different (p < 0.05).