Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems

Eun-Hwa Oh; Kyoung-Kyu Choi; Jong-Ryul Kim; Sang-Jin Park

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.2.148

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 33(2); 2008 > Article

Original Article Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems: Eun-Hwa Oh, Kyoung-Kyu Choi, Jong-Ryul Kim, Sang-Jin Park; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2008;33(2):148-161.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.2.148
Published online: March 31, 2008

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: February 28, 2008 • Revised: March 7, 2008 • Accepted: March 10, 2008

17 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

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;26: 1-20.Article PubMed
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;24: 3795-3803.PubMed
3. Okuda M, Pereira PNR, Nakajima M. Long-term durability of resin dentin interface: nanoleakage vs microtensile bond strength. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 289-296.PubMed
4. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y. Four-year Water Degradation of Total-etch Adhesives Bonded to Dentin. J Dent Res. 2003;2: 136-140.
5. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Yiu C. Callagen Degradation by Host-derived Enzymes during Aging. J Dent Res. 2004;83: 216-221.Article PubMed PDF
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;79: 1385-1391.Article PubMed PDF
8. Chaussain-Miller C, Fioretti F, Goldberg M. The role of matrix metalloproteinases(MMPs) in Human Caries. J Dent Res. 2006;85: 22-32.Article PubMed PDF
9. Sorsa T, Tjaderhane L, Salo T. Matrix metalloproteinases(MMPs) in oral disease. Oral Dis. 2004;10: 311-318.PubMed
10. Hebling J, Pashley DH, Tjaderhane L. Chlorhexidine arrests subclinical degradation of dentin hybrid layers in vivo. J Dent Res. 2005;84: 741-746.PubMed
11. Carrilho MR, Carvalho RM. Chlorhexidine preserves dentin bond in vitro. J Dent Res. 2007;86: 90-94.Article PubMed PDF
12. Carrilho MR, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Mechnical stability of resin-dentin bond components. Dent Mater. 2005;21: 232-241.PubMed
13. Carrilho MR, Carvalho RM, Tay FR. Durability of resin-dentin bonds related to water and oil storage. Am J Dent. 2005;18: 315-319.PubMed
14. De Castro F, De Andrade M. Effect of 2% chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of composite to dentin. J Adhes Dent. 2003;5: 129-138.PubMed
15. Martin-De Las Heras S, Valenzuela A, Overall CM. The matrix metalloproteinases gelatinases A in human dentin. Arch Oral Biol. 2000;45: 757-765.PubMed
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;84: 118-132.Article PubMed PDF
17. Nagase H, Visse R, Mruphy G. Structure and function of matrix metalloproteinases and TIMPs. Cardiovasc Res. 2006;69: 562-573.Article PubMed
18. Nishitani Y, Yoshiyama M, Wadgaonkar B. Activation of gelatinolytic/collagenolytic activity in dentin by self-etching adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci. 2006;114: 160-166.PubMed
19. Dumas J, Hurion N, Weill R. Collagenases in mineralized tissues of human teeth. FEBS Lett. 1985;187: 51-55.PubMed
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;80: 1545-1549.Article PubMed PDF
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;77: 1622-1629.Article PubMed PDF
22. Van Strijp AJ, Van Steenbergen TJ, De Graaff J. Bacterial colonization and degradation of demineralized dentin matrix in situ. Caries Res. 1994;28: 21-27.PubMed
23. Van Strijp AJ, Van Steenbergen TJ, ten Cate JM. Bacterial colonization of mineralized and completely demineralized dentin in situ. Caries Res. 1997;31: 349-355.Article PubMed
24. Birkedal-Hansen H, Moore WG, Bodden MK. Matrix metalloproteinases: a review. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1993;4: 197-250.Article PubMed PDF
25. Bode W, Fernandez-Catalan C, Tschesche H. Structural properties of matrix metalloproteinases. Cell Mol Life Sci. 1999;55: 639-652.Article PubMed PMC PDF
26. Van Strijp AJ, Jansen DC, De Groot J. Host-derived proteinases and degradation of dentine collagen in situ. Caries Res. 2003;37: 58-65.PubMed
27. Brackett WW, Tay FR, Brackett MG. The effect of chlorhexidine on dentin hybrid layers in vivo. Oper Dent. 2007;32: 107-111.Article PubMed PDF
28. Carrilho MR, Geraldeli S, Tay F. In vivo preservation of the hybrid layer by chlorhexidine. J Dent Res. 2007;86: 529-533.Article PubMed PDF
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;17: 445-455.PubMed
30. Lin A, Mclntyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on the adhesion of glass ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res. 1992;71: 1836-1841.PubMed
31. Van Meerbeek B, Vargas S, Inoue S. Adhesives and cements to promote preservation dentistry. Oper Dent. 2001;26: Suppl 6. S119-S144.
32. Yoshida Y, Van Meerbeek B, Nakayama Y. Evidence of chemical bonding at biomaterial-hard tissue interfaces. J Dent Res. 2000;79: 709-714.Article PubMed PDF
33. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent. 1999;27: 89-99.Article PubMed
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;75: 879-888.PubMed
35. Eliades G, Vougiouklakis G, Palaghias G. Heterogenous distribution of single-bottle adhesive monomers in the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone. Dent Mater. 2001;17: 277-283.PubMed

Figure 1

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

Figure 2

Specimen preparation for microtensile bond testing and thermocycling procedures.

Figure 3

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table 1

Materials used in this study

Table 2

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

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

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

Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2008;33(2):148-161. Published online March 31, 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.2.148

XML Download

Figure

Related articles

Effect of an aluminum chloride hemostatic agent on the dentin shear bond strength of a universal adhesive

Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems

Figure 1 Diagram of experimental groups according to the modes of specimen treatments.

Figure 2 Specimen preparation for microtensile bond testing and thermocycling procedures.

Figure 3 The microtensile bond strength (MPa) with/without CHX and thermocycles (10,000 cycles).

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 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 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 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)

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Effect of chlorhexidine on microtensile bond strength of dentin bonding systems

Table 1

Materials used in this study

Table 2

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

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

Table 1 Materials used in this study

Table 2 Microtensile Bond Strengths (MPa, mean ± SD) of 16 Experimental Groups

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