The purpose of this study was to compare the normal and two times of application time of six self-etching primers applied to enamel using microshear bond strength (uSBS) test and the finding of scanning electronic microscope (SEM).

Crown of sixty human molars were bisected mesiodistally and buccal and lingual enamel of crowns were partially exposed and polished with 600 grit SiC papers. They were divided into one of two equal groups subdivided into one of six equal groups (n = 10) by self-etching primer adhesives.

After the same manufacture's adhesive resin and composites were bonded on the enamel surface of each group, the bonded specimens were subjected to uSBS testing and also observed under SEM.

In conclusion, generally two times of primer application time increased the enamel uSBS, especially with the statistical increase of bond strength in adhesives involving high-pH primers.

The purpose of this study was to compare the apical microleakage in root canal filled with Resilon by several self-etching primers and methacrylate-based root canal sealer. Seventy single-rooted human teeth were used in this study. The canals were instrumented by a crown-down manner with Gate-Glidden drills and .04 Taper Profile to ISO #40. The teeth were randomly divided into four experimental groups of 15 teeth each according to root canal filling material and self-etching primers and two control groups (positive and negative) of 5 teeth each as follows: group 1 - gutta percha and AH26® sealer; group 2 - Resilon, RealSeal™ primer and RealSeal™ sealer; group 3 - Resilon, Clearfil SE Bond® primer and RealSeal™ sealer group 4 - Resilon, AdheSe® primer and RealSeal™ sealer. Apical leakage was measured by a maximum length of linear dye penetration of roots sectioned longitudinally by diamond disk. Statistical analysis was performed using the One-way ANOVA followed by Scheffe's test. There were no statistical differences in the mean apical dye penetration among the groups 2, 3 and 4 of self-etching primers. And group 1, 2 and 3 had also no statistical difference in apical dye penetration. But, there was statistical difference between group 1 and 4 (p < 0.05). The group 1 showed the least dye penetration. According to the results of this study, Resilon with self-etching primer was not sealed root canal better than gutta precha with AH26® at sealing root canals. And there was no significant difference in apical leakage among the three self-etching primers.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of passive or active application of primer and coat times of bond on the shear bond strength when a self-etching primer adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) was applied to enamel surface.

Crowns of sixteen human molars were selected. Buccal and lingual enamels of crowns were partially exposed and slabs of 1.2 mm thick were made. They were divided into one of four equal groups (n = 8). Group 1: passive application of Primer and 1 coat of Bond, Group 2: active application of Primer and 1 coat of Bond, Group 3: passive application of Primer and 2 coats of Bond, Group 4: active application of Primer and 2 coats of Bond. Clearfil AP-X was bonded to enamel suface of each group using Tygon tubes. The bonded specimens were subjected to microshear bond strength (uSBS) testing with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.

The results of this study were as follows;

The uSBS of Group 1 was the lowest among groups and the uSBS of Group 4 was the highest.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of burs on microleakage of Class V resin restorations when a self-etching primer adhesive was used.

Forty Class V cavities were prepared with four different cutting burs on extracted third molars, and divided into one of four equal groups (n = 10); Group 1-plain cut carbide bur (no. 245), Group 2-cross cut carbide bur (no. 557), Group 3-fine diamond bur (TF-21F), Group 4-standard diamond bur (EX-41).

The occlusal and gingival margin of cavities was located in enamel and dentin, respectively. Cavities were treated with Clearfil SE Bond and restored with Clearfil AP-X. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, and bisected longitudinally. They were observed leakages at enamel and dentinal margins. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test.

The results of this study were as follows;

1. At enamel margin, microleakage of group 4 was statistically higher than those of group 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.01).

2. At dentinal margin, microleakage of group 4 was statistically higher than group 3 (p < 0.01), but group 1 and 2 were not statistically different with group 3 and 4.

3. Enamel microleakage was statistically higher than dentinal microleakage in group 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.05), but statistical difference between the microleakage of enamel and dentinal margin was not in group 4.

In conclusion, the use of coarse diamond bur showed high microleakage at both enamel and dentinal margin when Clearfil SE Bond was used in class V cavity.

This study evaluated the influence of application time of self-etching primers on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to dentin using three self-etching primer adhesive systems.

Dentin surfaces were exposed from forty-eight human molars. They were conditioned with three self-etching primers (Clearfil SE Bond [SE], Unifil Bond [UF], Tyrian SPE + One Step Plus [TY]) and different primining times (10s, 20s, 30s and 40s). Composite resins were bonded to dentin surfaces and specimens were made. μTBS was tested and statistically compared using by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s Test.

The results of this study presented that priming time for 10s in SE and UF groups and for 30s and 40s in TY group was highly decreased μTBS to dentin.

The purpose of this study was to compare and to evaluate the combination use of 5 kinds of dentin adhesive systems and 5 kinds of composite resins using micro-shear bond test. Five adhesive systems (Prime & Bond NT (PBN), Onecoat bond (OC), Excite (EX), Syntac (SY), Clearfil SE bond (CS)) and five composite resins (Spectrum (SP), Synergy Compact (SC), Tetric Ceram (TC), Clearfil AP-X (CA), Z100 (Z1)) were used for this study (5 × 5 = 25group, n = 14/group). The slices of horizontally sectioned human tooth were bonded with each bonding system and each composite resin, and tested by a micro-shear bond strength test. These results were analyzed statistically. The mean micro-shear bond strength of dentin adhesive systems were in order of CS (22.642 MPa), SY (18.368 MPa), EX (14.599 MPa), OC (13.702 MPa), PBN (12.762 MPa). The mean bond strength of self-etching primer system group (CS, SY) in dentin was higher than that of self-priming adhesive system groups (PBN, EX, OC) significantly (P<0.05). The mean bond strength of composite resins was in order of SP (19.008 MPa), CA (17.532 MPa), SC (15.787 MPa), TC (15.068 MPa), Z1 (14.678 MPa). Micro-shear bond strength of SP was stronger than those of other composite resins significantly (P < 0.05). And those of TC and Z1 were weaker than other composite resins significantly (P < 0.05). No difference was found in micro-shear bond strength of composite resin in self-etching primer adhesive system groups (CS, SY) statistically. However, there was significant difference of micro-shear bond strength of composite resin groups in self-priming adhesive systems group (PBN, EX, OC). The combination of composite resin and dentin adhesive system recommended by manufacturer did not represent positive correlation. It didn’t seem to be a significant factor.

The purpose of this study was to compare in vitro interfacial relationship of restorations bonded with three self-etching primer adhesives and one self-etching adhesive.

Class I cavity preparations were prepared on twenty extracted human molars. Prepared teeth were divided into four groups and restored with four adhesives and composites: Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil™ AP-X (SE), UniFil Bond/UniFil® F (UF), FL Bond/Filtek™ Z 250 (FL) and Prompt L-Pop/Filtek™ Z 250 (LP)

After storing in distilled water of room temperature for 24 hours, the specimens were vertically sectioned and decalcified. Morphological patterns between the enamel/dentin and adhesives were observed under SEM.

The results of this study were as follows;

1. They showed close adaptation between enamel and SE, UF and FL except for LP.

2. The hybrid layer in dentin was 2 µm thick in SE, 1.5 µm thick in UF, and 0.4 µm in both FL and LP. So, the hybrid layers of SE and UF were slightly thicker than that of FL and LP.

3. The lengths and diameters of resin tags in UF and FL were similar, but those of LP were slightly shorter and slenderer than those of SE.

4. The resin tags were long rod shape in SE, and funnel shape in other groups.

Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that self-etching primer adhesives showed close adaptation on enamel. In addition, the thickness of hybrid layer ranged from 0.4-1.5 µm between adhesives and dentin. The resin tags were long rod or funnel shape, and dimension of them was similar or different among adhesives.

This study investigated the influence of IRM on marginal microleakage of 5th generation adhesives. Class V cavities with gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 60 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into six groups. Group 1 and 4 received no temporary restoration with IRM. Group 2 and 5 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/1g). Group 3 and 6 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/2g). The temporary restorations were removed mechanically with an ultrasonic scaler after one-week storage in distilled water. The cavities were restored using one of two adhesives and composites; Single Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 1, 2 and 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4, 5 and 6).

Following one day storage in distilled water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles(between 5℃ and 55℃) and immersed in 2% methylene blue for dye penetration testing. The results were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test at a significance level of 0.05.

The results of this study were as follows:

1. Ranking of mean microleakage scores at the enamel margins was Group 1<Group 3<Group 2<Group 4<Group 5<Group 6. The microleakage of Group 6 was significantly higher than that of Groups 1, 2 and 3(p<0.05).

2. At the enamel margins, without regard to pretreatment with IRM, the microleakage of Single Bond was lower than that of UniFil Bond.

3. Ranking of mean microleakage scores at the dentin margins was Group 4<Group 1<Group 5<Group 6<Group 3<Group 2. But there were no significant difference among microleakages of each group(p>0.05).

4. At the dentin margins, the microleakage of the group not pretreated with IRM was lower than that of the group pretreated with IRM. And the microleakage of UniFil Bond was lower than that of Single Bond.

5. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentin margins of each groups, Group 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 at dentin margin were higher microleakage than those at enamel margin. There were significant difference between enamel and dentin microleakage of Group 2 and 3(p<0.05).

This study evaluated the microleakage performance of four self-etcing primer adhesives(Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil Liner Bond 2, UniFil Bond, and FL Bond) and one self-etching adhesive(Prompt L-Pop). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of five adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z 250(Group 1), Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil AP-X(Group 2), Clearfil Liner Bond 2/Clearfil AP-X(Group 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4), and FL Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 5).

Following one day storage in room temperature water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5℃ and 55℃. Marginal microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye. After 24 hours, the teeth 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.

The results of this study were as follows;

1. The microleakges at both enamel and dentinal margins were the lowest in group 4, increasing among groups in the following order: group 2, follwed by group 5, follwed by group 1, and the highest in group 3.

2. At the enamel margins, the microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than those of groups 2, 4 and 5(p<0.05), and also the microleakage of group 1 was statistically higher than those of groups 2 and 5(p<0.05).

3. At the dentinal margins, microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than microleakages of groups 1, 2, 4 and 5(p<0.05).

4. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentinal margins of each group, groups 1, 4 and 5 at enamel margin and group 2 and group 3 at dentinal margin were higher microleakage. But there was no significant difference between enamel and dentinal microleakages of each group(p>0.05).