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

Sung-Ae Son; Bock Hur

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.5.423

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(5); 2004 > Article

Original Article THE EFFECT OF MULTIPLE APPLICATION ON MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH OF ALL-IN-ONE DENTIN ADHESIVE SYSTEMS: Sung-Ae Son^,*, Bock Hur; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2004;29(5):423-429.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.5.423
Published online: January 14, 2004

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

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.

17 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

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

Dentin bonding agent	Composition
Scotchbond Multi-Purpose	Conditioner - 35% phosphoric acid
	Primer - HEMA, polyalkenoic acid, co-polymer, water
	Adhesive resin - Bis-GMA, HEMA

Adper Prompt L-Pop (composite and compomer version)	Liquid 1 (red blister)
	Methacrylated phosphoric esters
	Bis-GMA
	Initiators based on camphorquinone, Stabilizers
	Liquid 2 (yellow blister)
	Water, 2-HEMA Polyalkenoic acid, Stabilizer

Table 2.

Adhesive system tested in the study and application protocol

Treatment group	Application protocol
Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (SM)	acid etching : 15sec
	washing : 15sec ; dry
	primer application and gently air dry
	adhesive (rhodamine B labeled) and light curing : 20sec

Adper Prompt L-Pop 2 coats (2 coats)	apply scrubbing continuously for 15sec (rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec
	apply consecutive coats without waiting between application
	(rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec

Adper Prompt L-Pop 3 coats (3 coats)	apply second coat
	apply consecutive coats without waiting between application
	(rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec

Table 3.

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

Groups	TAL (㎛)	MTBS (MPa)
SM	(n = 51) 62.35 ± 14.71	(n = 30) 20.09 ± 5.19
2 coat	(n = 36) 19.72 ± 5.97	(n = 30) 15.07 ± 4.01
3 coat	(n = 36) 76.25 ± 19.47	(n = 30) 19.26 ± 6.36

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.Article PubMed PDF
2. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Fatigue behaviour of different dentin adhesives. Clin Oral Investig 3:11-17. 1999.PubMed
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.Article PubMed
4. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentinal bonding. Quintessence Int 27:619-625. 1996.PubMed
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.PubMed
7. Gwinnett AJ. Moist versus dry dentin: its effect on shear bond strength. Am J Dent 5:127-129. 1992.PubMed
8. Kanca J. 3rd. Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 23:39-41. 1992.PubMed
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.PubMed
10. Tanumiharja M, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems. Dent Mater 16:180-187. 2000.PubMed
11. Gwinnett AJ. Dentin bond strength after air drying and rewetting. Am J Dent 7:144-148. 1994.PubMed
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.Article PubMed
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.PubMed
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.PubMed
15. Rosa BT, Perdigao J. Bond strengths of nonrinsing adhesives. Quintessence Int 31:353-358. 2000.PubMed
16. Blunck U, Roulet JF. Marginal adaptation of com-pomer Class V restorations in vitro. J Adhes Dent 1:143-151. 1999.PubMed
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.PubMed
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.PubMed
19. Fritz UB, Finger WJ. Bonding efficiency of single-bottle enamel/dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 12:277-282. 1999.PubMed
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.Article PubMed
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.PubMed
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.PubMed
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.Article PubMed PDF
24. Duke ES. Adhesion and its application with restorative materials. Dent Clin North Am 37:329-340. 1993.Article PubMed
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.Article PubMed PDF
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.PubMed
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.Article PubMed PDF
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.Article PubMed PDF
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.PubMed
30. Sudsangiam S, van Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose? J Adhes Dent 1:57-67. 1999.PubMed
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.Article PubMed PDF
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.Article PubMed
33. Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS. The effect of air thinning on dentin adhesive bond strength. Oper Dent 20:133-137. 1995.PubMed
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.PubMed
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.PubMed
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.PubMed
37. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentinal bonding. Quintessence Int 27:619-625. 1996.PubMed
38. Oysaed H, Ruyter IE, Sjovik Kleven IJ. Release of formaldehyde from dental composites. J Dent Res 67:1289-1294. 1988.PubMed
39. Ruyter IE. Unpolymerized surface layers on sealants. Acta Odontol Scand 39:27-32. 1981.Article PubMed
40. Ban S, Hasegawa J. Heat of polymerization of dimethacrylate monomers investigated by isothermal DSC measurement. Dent Mater 3:85-92. 1984.Article PubMed
41. Rueggeberg FA, Margeson DH. The effect of oxygen inhibition on an unfilled/filled composite system. J Dent Res 69:1652-658. 1990.Article PubMed PDF
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.PubMed
43. Causton BE, Sefton J. Some bonding characteristics of a HEMA/maleic acid adhesion promoter. Br Dent J 167:308-311. 1989.Article PubMed PDF

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

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

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(5):423-429. Published online January 14, 2004

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

XML Download

Figure

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

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.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

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

Dentin bonding agent	Composition
Scotchbond Multi-Purpose	Conditioner - 35% phosphoric acid
	Primer - HEMA, polyalkenoic acid, co-polymer, water
	Adhesive resin - Bis-GMA, HEMA

Adper Prompt L-Pop (composite and compomer version)	Liquid 1 (red blister)
	Methacrylated phosphoric esters
	Bis-GMA
	Initiators based on camphorquinone, Stabilizers
	Liquid 2 (yellow blister)
	Water, 2-HEMA Polyalkenoic acid, Stabilizer

Treatment group	Application protocol
Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (SM)	acid etching : 15sec
	washing : 15sec ; dry
	primer application and gently air dry
	adhesive (rhodamine B labeled) and light curing : 20sec

Adper Prompt L-Pop 2 coats (2 coats)	apply scrubbing continuously for 15sec (rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec
	apply consecutive coats without waiting between application
	(rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec

Adper Prompt L-Pop 3 coats (3 coats)	apply second coat
	apply consecutive coats without waiting between application
	(rhodamine B labeled)
	gently air dry ; light curing for 10sec

Groups	TAL (㎛)	MTBS (MPa)
SM	(n = 51) 62.35 ± 14.71	(n = 30) 20.09 ± 5.19
2 coat	(n = 36) 19.72 ± 5.97	(n = 30) 15.07 ± 4.01
3 coat	(n = 36) 76.25 ± 19.47	(n = 30) 19.26 ± 6.36

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)