Microshear bond strength of adhesives according to the direction of enamel rods

Young-Gon Cho; Jong-Jin Kim

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.4.344

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 30(4); 2005 > Article

Original Article Microshear bond strength of adhesives according to the direction of enamel rods: Young-Gon Cho, Jong-Jin Kim; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2005;30(4):344-351.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.4.344
Published online: July 30, 2005

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

Corresponding author: Young-Gon Cho. Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, 421 Seosuk-dong, Dong-gu, Gwangju, Korea, 501-825. Tel: 82-62-220-3840, 3845, Fax: 82-62-232-9064, ygcho@mail.chosun.ac.kr

• Received: December 31, 2004 • Revised: July 1, 2005 • Accepted: July 3, 2005

24 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

This study compared the microshear bond strength (µSBS) to end and side of enamel rod bonded by four adhesives including two total etch adhesives and two self-etch adhesives.

Crown segments of extracted human molars were cut mesiodistally. The outer buccal or lingual surface was used as specimens cutting the ends of enamel rods, and inner slabs used as specimens cutting the sides of enamel rods.

They were assigned to four groups by used adhesives: Group 1 (All-Bond 2), Group 2 (Single Bond), Group 3 (Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus), Group 4 (Adper Prompt L-Pop). After each adhesive was applied to enamel surface, three composite cylinders were adhered to it of each specimen using Tygon tube. After storage in distilled water for 24 hours, the bonded specimens were subjected to µSBS testing with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The results of this study were as follows;

1. The µSBS of Group 2 (16.50 ± 2.31 _MPa) and Group 4 (15.83 ± 2.33 _MPa) to the end of enamel prism was significantly higher than that of Group 1 (11.93 ± 2.25 _MPa) and Group 3 (11.97 ± 2.05 _MPa) (p < 0.05).

2. The µSBS of Group 2 (13.43 ± 2.93 _MPa) to the side of enamel prism was significantly higher than that of Group 1 (8.64 ± 1.53 _MPa), Group 3 (9.69 ± 1.80 _MPa), and Group 4 (10.56 ± 1.75 _MPa) (p < 0.05).

3. The mean µSBS to the end of enamel rod was significantly higher than that to the side of enamel rod in all group (p < 0.05).
Keywords: Microshear bond strength; Enamel rod; Total etch adhesives; Self-etch adhesives; Slabs

REFERENCES

1. Inoue S, Vargas MA, Abe Y, Abe Y, Yoshida Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Sano H, Van Meerbeek B. Microtensile bond strength of eleven contemporary adhesives to enamel. Am J Dent. 2003;16: 329-334.PubMed
2. Cardoso PFC, Meloncini MA, Placido E, Lima JDO, Tavares AU. Influence of the substrate and load application method on the shear bond strength of two adhesive systems. Oper Dent. 2003;28(4):388-394.PubMed
3. Dickens SH, Milos MF. Relationship of dentin shear bond strengths to different laboratory test designs. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 185-192.PubMed
4. Fanchi M, Breschi L. Effects of acid-etching solutions on human enamel and dentin. Quintessence Int. 1995;26: 431-435.PubMed
5. Gilpatrick RO, Ross JA, Simonsen RJ. Resin-to-enamel bond strengths with various etching times. Quintessence Int. 1991;22: 47-49.PubMed
6. Hannig M, Reinhardt KJ, Bott B. Self-etching primer vs phosphoric acid: an alternative concept for composite-to-enamel bonding. Oper Dent. 1999;24: 172-180.PubMed
7. Hara AT, Amaral CM, Pimenta LAF, Sinhoreti MAC. Shear bond strength of hydrophilic adhesive systems to enamel. Am J Dent. 1999;12: 181-184.PubMed
8. Ikeda T, Uno S, Tanaka T, Kawakami S, Komatsu H, Sano H. Relation of enamel prism orientation to microtensile bond strength. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 109-113.PubMed
9. Toledano M, Osorio R, de Leonardi G, Rosales-Leal JI, Ceballos L, Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA. Influence of self-etching primer on the resin adhesion to enamel and dentin. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 205-210.PubMed
10. Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. part II : etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater. 2001;17: 430-444.PubMed
11. Fabianelli A, Kugel G, Ferrari M. Efficacy of self-etching primer on sealing margins of class II restorations. Am J Dent. 2003;16: 37-41.PubMed
12. Torii Y, Itou K, Nishitani Y, Ishikawa K, Suzuki K. Effect of phosphoric acid etching to self-etching primer application on adhesion of resin composite to enamel and dentin. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 305-308.PubMed
13. Miyazaki M, Hinoura K, Honjo G, Onose H. Effect of self-etching primer application method on enamel bond strength. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 412-416.PubMed
14. Kanemura N, Sano H, Tagami J. Tensile bond strength to and SEM evaluation of ground and intact enamel surfaces. J Dent. 1999;27: 523-530.Article PubMed
15. Perdigao J, Lopes L, Lambrechts P, Leitao J, Van Meerbeek B. Effects of a self-etching primer on enamel shear bond strengths and SEM morphology. Am J Dent. 1997;10: 141-146.PubMed
16. Shimada Y, Kikushima D, Tagami J. Micro-shear bond strength of resin-bonding systems to cervical enamel. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 373-377.PubMed
17. Shimada Y, Senawongse P, Harnirattisai C, Burrow MF, Nakaoki Y, Tagami J. Bond strength of two adhesive systems to primary and permanent enamel. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 403-409.PubMed
18. Munechika T, Suzuki K, Nishiyama M, Ohashi M, Horie K. A comparison of the tensile bond strengths of composite resins to longitudinal and transverse sections of enamel prisms in human teeth. J Dent Res. 1984;63(8):1079-1082.Article PubMed PDF
19. Carvalho RM, Santiago SL, Fernandes CA, Suh BI, Pashley DH. Effect of prism orientation on tensile strength of enamel. J Adhes Dent. 2000;2(4):251-257.
20. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Long-term effect of dentin primers on enamel bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent. 2000;25: 11-19.PubMed
21. Sano H, Shono T, Sonoda H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Carvalho RM, Pashley DH. Relationship between surface area for adhesion and tensile bond strength-evaluation of micro-tensile bond test. Dent Mater. 1994;10: 236-240.PubMed
22. Shimada Y, Tagami J. Effects of regional enamel and prism orientation on resin bonding. Oper Dent. 2003;28: 20-27.PubMed
23. Shimada Y, Iwamoto N, Kawashima M, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Shear bond strength of current adhesive systems to enamel, dentin and dentin-enamel junction region. Oper Dent. 2003;28: 585-590.PubMed
24. Yoshiyama M, Sano H, Ebisu S, Tagami J, Ciucchi B, Carvalho RM, Jonson MH, Pashley DH. Regional strengths of bonding agents to cervical sclerotic root dentin. J Dent Res. 1996;75: 1404-1413.Article PubMed PDF

Figure 1

Specimens; end of enamel rod (left) and side of enamel rod (right).

Figure 2

Specimen adhered to the shear testing apparatus.

Table 1

Gloup classification by adhesives and composites

Table 2

Mean microshear bond strength to end of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop Superscripts of the other letter indicate values of statistically significant difference by Tukey test (p < 0.05).

Table 3

Mean microshear bond strength to side of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop

Superscripts of the other letter indicate values of statistically significant difference by Tukey test (p < 0.05).

Table 4

Statistical comparison between µSBS to end and side of enamel rods in each group by t-test

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop, ^*: statistical signigicant difference

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

Microshear bond strength of adhesives according to the direction of enamel rods

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2005;30(4):344-351. Published online July 30, 2005

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.4.344

XML Download

Figure

Microshear bond strength of adhesives according to the direction of enamel rods

Figure 1 Specimens; end of enamel rod (left) and side of enamel rod (right).

Figure 2 Specimen adhered to the shear testing apparatus.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Microshear bond strength of adhesives according to the direction of enamel rods

Table 1

Gloup classification by adhesives and composites

Table 2

Mean microshear bond strength to end of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Table 3

Mean microshear bond strength to side of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop

Superscripts of the other letter indicate values of statistically significant difference by Tukey test (p < 0.05).

Table 4

Statistical comparison between µSBS to end and side of enamel rods in each group by t-test

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop, ^*: statistical signigicant difference

Table 1 Gloup classification by adhesives and composites

Table 2 Mean microshear bond strength to end of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Table 3 Mean microshear bond strength to side of enamel rod (Unit: MPa, Mean ± S.D.)

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop

Superscripts of the other letter indicate values of statistically significant difference by Tukey test (p < 0.05).

Table 4 Statistical comparison between µSBS to end and side of enamel rods in each group by t-test

Group 1: All-Bond 2, Group 2: Single Bond, Group 3: Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus, Group 4: Adper Prompt L-Pop, ^*: statistical signigicant difference