Effect of a rewetting agent on dentin adhesion

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2003;28(1):11-22

Publication date (electronic) : 2003 January 31

doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2003.28.1.011

Young-Gon Cho , Yil-Yoon Park , Young-Gon Lee

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, Korea.

Corresponding author (ygcho@mail.chosun.ac.kr)

Abstract

This study compared the dentin adhesion to composite resin according to air-dry, blot dry, application of rewetting agent on air-dry or blot dry dentin surface by microleakag test and SEM observation.

For microleakage test, class V cavity preparations with dentinal margins were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 extracted human molars. For SEM observation, occlusal dentin of 20 extracted human molars were exposed.

After etched the dentin, prepared teeth were randomly divided into four groups;

D group: air dry for 10-15 sec., B group: blot dry with moist cotton pellet, D-R group: air dry and rewet with Aqua-Prep F for 20 sec., B-R group: blot dry and rewet with Aqua-Prep F for 20 sec.

Treated cavities and surfaces were filled or constructed using One-Step adhesives and Aelitefil composite resins. Specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours. For microleakage test, the specimens were thermocycled and soaked into 2% methylene blue. The specimens were sectioned longitudinally and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests. For SEM observation, the specimens were bisectioned mesiodiatally. After decalcified and deproteinized, specimens were observed under SEM.

The results of this study were as follows;

1. The microleakges on dentinal margin were the highest in D group compared with B group, D-R group, and B-R group(p<0.05). But there was no significant difference between B group, D-R group and B-R group.

2. D group showed gap and a few resin tags between dentin and composite resin.

3. B group, D-R group, and B-R groups showed close adaptation between dentin and composite resin. It showed that resin rags in B group were numerous and long, in D-R group were few and short, in B-R group were numerous and short or long.

4. Adhesive layer showed in D-R group (10 µm) and B-R group (3 µm)

In conclusion, use of rewetting agent to dry dentin was efficient to dentin adhesion, also it did not provide reverse effect on blot dry dentin.

Keywords: Dentin adhesion; Air-dry; Blot dry; Rewetting agent; Microleakage; SEM

References

1. Applequist EA, Meiers JC. Effect of bulk insertion, prepolymerized resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int 1996. 27253–258.

2. Mehl A, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Physical properties and gap formation of light-cured comlpposites with and without sofstart polymerization. J Dent 1997. 25321–330.

3. Taylor MJ, Lynch E. Microleakage: Review. J Dent 1992. 203–10.

4. Prati C, Tao L, Simpson M. Permeability and microleakage of class II resin composite resin restorations. J Dent 1994. 2249–56.

5. Bauer JF, Henson JL. Microleakage: a measure of the performance of direct filling materials. Oper Dent 1984. 92–9.

6. Kidd EAM. Microleakage: a review. J Dent 1976. 4199–205.

7. Santini A, Plasschaert AJM, Mitchell S. Marginal leakage of filled dentin adhesives used with wet and dry bonding techniques. Am J Dent 2000. 13(2)93–97.

8. Amaral CM, Hara AT, Pimenta LAF, Rodrigues Jr. AL : Microleakage of hydrophillic systems in class V composite restorations. Am J Dent 2001. 14(1)31–34.

9. Nakajima M, Sano H, Urabe I. Bond strength of single bottle dentin adhesives to caries-affected dentin. Oper Dent 2000. 252–10.

10. Nakabayashi N, Kojima K, Masuhara E. The promotion of adhesion by infiltratrion of monomers into tooth substrates. J Biomed Mater Res 1982. 16265–273.

11. Pioch T, Staehle HJ, Schneider H, Duschner H, Dörfer CE. Effect of intrapulpal pressure simulation in vitro on shear bond strenghts and hybrid layer formation. Am J Dent 2001. 14(5)319–323.

12. Gallo JR, Henderson M, Burgess JO. Shear bond strength to moist and dry dentin of four dentin bonding systems. Am J Dent 2000. 13(5)267–270.

13. Tay FR, Gwinnett AJ, Wei SHY. Micromorphological spectrum from overdrying to overwetting acid-conditioned dentin in water-free, acetone-based, single-bottle primer-adhesives. Dent Mater 1996. 12236–244.

14. Kanca J. Effect of drying on bonding strength. J Dent Res 1991. 70304. (Abstract 1029).

15. Gwinnett AJ. Moist versus dry dentin: its effect on shear bond strength. Am J Dent 1992. 5127–129.

16. Gwinnett AJ. Dentin bond strength after air drying and rewetting. Am J Dent 1994. 7(3)144–148.

17. Gwinnett AJ, Kanca J. Micromorphology of the bonded dentin interface and its relationship to bond strength. Am J Dent 1992. 573–77.

18. Kanca J. Resin bonding to wet substrate. I. bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 1992. 23(1)39–41.

19. Kanca J. Effect of resin primer solvents and surface wetness on resin composite bond strength to dentin. Am J Dent 1992. 5213–215.

20. Kanca J. Wet bonding: Effect of drying time and distance. Am J Dent 1996. 9273–276.

21. Kanca J, Sandrik J. Bonding to dentin, clues to the mechanism of adhesion. Am J Dent 1998. 11154–159.

22. Perdigao J, Swift EJ, Cloe BC. Effects of etchants, surface moisture, and resin composite on dentin bond strength. Am J Dent 1993. 661–64.

23. Perdigão J, Swift EJ, Heymann HO, Malek MA. Effect of a re-wetting agent on the performance of acetone-based dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 1998. 11207–213.

24. Miears JR, Charlton DG, Hermesch CB. Effect of dentin moisture and storage time on resin bonding. Am J Dent 1995. 880–82.

25. Perdigao J, Geraldeli S, Carmo ARP, Dutra HR. In vivo influence of residual moisture on microtensile bond strength of one-bottle adhesives. J Esthet Restor Dent 2002. 14(1)31–38.

26. Tay FR, Gwinnett AJ, Wei SHY. Micromorphological spectrum of acid conditioned dentin following the application of a water-based adhesive. Dent Mater 1998. 14329–338.

27. Perdigao J, Van Meerbeek B, Lopes MM, Ambrose WW. The effect of a re-wetting agent on dentin bonding. Dent Mater 1999. 15282–295.

28. Saunders WP, Saunders EM. Microleakage of bonding agents with wet versus dry bonding techniques. Am J Dent 1996. 934–36.

29. Santini A, Mitchell S. Effect of wet and dry bonding techniques on marginal leakage. Am J Dent 1998. 11219–224.

30. Santini A, Mitchell S. Microleakage of composite restorations bonded with three new bonding agents. J Esthet Dent 1998. 10296–304.

31. Ritter AV. Re-wetting agents for dentin bonding. J Esthet Restor Dent 2001. 13(6)387–395.

32. Swift EJ. Resin desensitizers. J Esthet Dent 1999. 11(6)289–290.

33. Gwinnett AJ. Chemically conditioned dentin: a comparison of conventional and environmental scanning electron microscopy findings. Dent Mater 1994. 10150–155.

34. Peschke A, Blunck U, Roulet JF. Influence of incorrect application of a water-based adhesive system on the marginal adaptation of class V restorations. Am J Dent 2000. 13(5)239–244.

35. Tay FR, Gwinnett AJ, Wei SHY. Ultrastructure of the resin-dentin interface following reversible and irreversible re-wetting. Am J Dent 1997. 1077–82.

36. Ritter AV, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr, Perdigao J, Rosa BT. Effects of different re-wetting techniques on dentin shear bond strengths. J Esthet Dent 2000. 12(2)85–96.

37. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Verschueren M. Clinical status of ten dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1994. 731690–1702.

38. Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of microleakage around dental restoration: a review. Oper Dent 1997. 22173–185.

39. Dietschi D, De Siebenthal G, Neveu-Rosenstand L. Influence of the restorative technique and new adhesives on the dentin marginal seal and adaptation of resin composite class II restoration: an in vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int 1995. 26717–727.

40. Mangum FI, Berry EA, DeSchepper E. Microleakage of incremental versus compression matrix bulk filling of cervical resin composite restorations. Gen Dent 1994. 42304–308.

41. Rossomando JJ, Wendt SLJ. Thermocycling and dwell times in microleakage evaluation for bonded restorations. Dent Mater 1995. 1147–51.

42. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechets P, Vanherle G. Microleakage of adhesive restorative materials. Am J Dent 2001. 14(3)170–176.

43. Setien VJ, Cobb D, Denehy GE, Vargas M. Cavity preparation devices: Effect on microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations. Am J Dent 2001. 14(3)157–162.

44. Barnes DM, McDonald NJ, Thompson VP, et al. Microleakage in facial and lingual Class 5 composite restorations: A comparison. Oper Dent 1994. 19133–137.

45. Maciel KT, Carvalho RM, Ringle RD, Preston CD, Russell CM, Pashley DH. The effects of acetone, ethanol, HEMA, and air on the stiffness of human decalcified dentin matrix. J Dent Res 1996. 751851–1858.

46. Santini A. Microleakage of resin-based composite restorations using different solvent-based bonding agents and methods of drying acid-etched dentin. Am J Dent 1999. 12(4)194–200.

47. Nakajima M, Kanemura N, Pereira PNR, Tagami J, Pashley DH. Comparative microtensile bond strength and SEM analysis of bonding to wet and dry dentin. Am J Dent 2000. 13(6)324–328.

48. Inokoshi S, Hosoda H, Harnirattisai C. Interfacial structure between dentin and seven dentin bonding systems revealed using argon ion beam etching. Oper Dent 1993. 188–16.

49. Sugizaki J. The effects of various primers on dentin adhesion of resin composites. SEM and TEM observation of the resin impregnated layer and adhesion promoting effect of the primer. Jpn J Conserv Dent 1991. 34228–265.

50. Watanabe I, Takarada K, Nakabayashi N. Adhesion of 4-META/MMA-TBB resin to dentin pretreated with phosphoric acid. J Jpn Dent Mater 1997. 10671–677.

51. Xu J, Stangel I, Butler IS, Gilson DFR. An FT-Raman spectroscopic investigation of dentin and collagen surface modified by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate. J Dent Res 1997. 76596–601.

52. Di Renzo M, Ellis T, Domingue A, Bertrand L, Sacher E, Stangel I. Chemical reactions between dentin and bonding agents. J Adhes Dent 1994. 47115–121.

53. Harashima I, Hirasawa T. Adsorption of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate on dentin from aqueous solution. Dent Mater J 1990. 936–46.

54. Munksgaard EC, Asmussen E. Bond strength between dentin and restorative resins mediated by mixtures of HEMA and glutaraldehyde. J Dent Res 1984. 631087–1089.

55. Nakabayashi N, Watanae A, Gendusa NJ. Dentin adhesion of modified 4-META/MMA-TBB resin : function of HEMA. Dent Mater 1992. 8259–264.

56. Suzuke K, Takahashi M, Nakai H. Treatment of dentin by aqueous solution of amino acid derivatives : HEMA. J Adhes Dent 1990. 843–51.

57. Itoh K, Wakumoto S. Momentary pretreatment by 35% HEMA solution combined with five marketed bonding agents. Dent Mater J 1987. 628–31.

58. Pilo R, Cardash HS, Oz-Ari B, Ben-Amar A. Effect of preliminary treatment of the dentin surface on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin. Oper Dent 2001. 26569–575.

Article information Continued

(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.

Fig. 1

Numbers of leakage scores of each group at dentin margin

Fig. 2

Resin-dentin interface produced using One-Step on dry dentin (D group). There is 10 µm thick gap (g) between composite (C) and dentin (D) and no discernible hybrid layer. (SEM×500)

Fig. 3

Higher magnification of D group (SEM×2,000). A few and short resin tags (t) of about 3-4 µm length protruded from composite (C) showed.

Fig. 4

Resin-dentin interface produced using One-Step on blot dry dentin (B group). Resin (C)-dentin (D) interface showed close adaptation and hybrid layer (h). A numerous 10-40 µm long resin tags showed from hybrid layer to dentin. (SEM×500)

Fig. 5

Higher magnification of B group (SEM×2,000). Hybrid layer (h) and funnel shaped resin tags (t) showed between composite (C) and dentin (D).

Fig. 6

Resin-dentin interface produced using One-Step on dry dentin rewetted with Aqua-Prep F (D-R group). Resin (C)-dentin (D) interface showed close adaptation and hybrid layer. Adhesive layer (a) of 10 µm thickness showed between composite (C) and hybrid layer (h). (SEM×500)

Fig. 7

Higher magnification of D-R group (SEM×2,000). Adhesive layer (a), short (about 10 µm long) and less profound resin tags (t), and hybrid layer (h) showed.

Fig. 8

Resin-dentin interface produced using One-Step on blot dry dentin rewetted with Aqua-Prep F (B-R group). Resin-dentin interface showed close adaptation and hybrid layer. Adhesive layer (a) of 3 µm thickness showed between composite (C) and hybrid layer (h). A numerous 10-40 µm long resin tags showed from hybrid layer to dentin (D). (SEM×500)