Search Results: 1 - 10 of 100 matches for " "
All listed articles are free for downloading (OA Articles)
Page 1 /100
Display every page Item
Marginal permeability of one step self-etch adhesives: Effects of double application or the application of hydrophobic layer
Pushpa R,Suresh B
Journal of Conservative Dentistry , 2010,
Abstract: Aim : The purpose of this in vitro investigation was to evaluate the influence of double application and application of hydrophobic layer on marginal adaptation of four self-etch adhesive systems (XENOIII, ALLBONDSE, CLEARFIL SE TRI BOND, FUTURA BOND). Materials and Methods : One hundred and twenty class V cavities were prepared on intact, extracted human premolars and were divided into three groups of ten teeth each for all four adhesives. Group 1: Application of bonding agents as per manufacturer directions. Group 2: Double application of bonding agents. Group 3: Application of hydrophobic layer. The specimens were restored with composite and light cured. After thermocycling and immersion in 2% Basic Fuchsin dye solution, the teeth were sectioned and dye penetration was observed under a stereomicroscope at 20× magnification. All the samples were scored and results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. Results : Group 3, in which the adhesive systems were coated with hydrophobic layer, showed significantly decreased microleakage, followed by Group 1 and Group 2 for all the adhesive systems. And there is no significant different between Group 1 and Group 2. Conclusion : Marginal permeability of one-step adhesives can be minimized by the application of more hydrophobic resin layer, and the double application of one-step self-etch system can be safely performed without jeopardizing the performance of adhesives.
An In Vitro Evaluation of Leakage of Two Etch and Rinse and Two Self-Etch Adhesives after Thermocycling  [PDF]
Sabine Geerts,Amandine Bolette,Laurence Seidel,Audrey Guéders
International Journal of Dentistry , 2012, DOI: 10.1155/2012/852841
Abstract: Our experiment evaluated the microleakage in resin composite restorations bonded to dental tissues with different adhesive systems. 40 class V cavities were prepared on the facial and lingual surfaces of each tooth with coronal margins in enamel and apical margins in cementum (root dentin). The teeth were restored with Z100 resin composite bonded with different adhesive systems: Scotchbond Multipurpose (SBMP), a 3-step Etch and Rinse adhesive, Adper Scotchbond 1 XT (SB1), a 2-step Etch and Rinse adhesive, AdheSE One (ADSE-1), a 1-step Self-Etch adhesive, and AdheSE (ADSE), a 2-step Self-Etch adhesive. Teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution. When both interfaces were considered, SBMP has exhibited significantly less microleakage than other adhesive systems (resp., for SB1, ADSE-1 and ADSE, , and ). When enamel and dentin interfaces were evaluated separately, (1) for the Self-Etch adhesives, microleakage was found greater at enamel than at dentin interfaces (for ADSE, and for ADSE-1, ); (2) for the Etch and Rinse adhesive systems, there was no significant difference between enamel and dentin interfaces; (3) SBMP was found significantly better than other adhesives both at enamel and dentin interfaces. In our experiment Etch and Rinse adhesives remain better than Self-Etch adhesives at enamel interface. In addition, there was no statistical difference between 1-step (ADSE-1) and 2-step (ADSE) Self-Etch adhesives. 1. Introduction Currently, resin composites are more often used for direct posterior teeth restorations since many advances were made in adhesion and adhesives long-term performances. Adhesives are necessary to prevent leakage on resin composite restorations while dental composites are not able to bond to dental tissues. However, clinical microleakage remains the major cause for composite restorations failures implying postoperative sensibility, margin colorations, secondary decay, or pulpal inflammation [1–5]. Therefore, manufacturers have proposed many different adhesives involving different adhesion strategies. These adhesive systems were well described by Van Meerbeek et al. [6–8]: the Etch and Rinse (ER) adhesive systems (in three or two clinical steps), the Self-Etch (SE) adhesive systems (in two or one clinical step(s)), and the glass ionomer adhesives [6–9]. In their in vitro studies, several authors have reported different dental adhesive systems’ bonding performance [10–24]. Therefore, results from thermocycling experiments have already pointed statistical differences between the ER adhesion strategy and the
Effect of an additional hydrophilic versus hydrophobic coat on the quality of dentinal sealing provided by two-step etchand-rinse adhesives
Silva, Safira Marques de Andrade e;Carrilho, Marcela Rocha de Oliveira;Marquezini Junior, Luiz;Garcia, Fernanda Cristina Pimentel;Manso, Adriana Pigozzo;Alves, Marcelo Corrêa;Carvalho, Ricardo Marins de;
Journal of Applied Oral Science , 2009, DOI: 10.1590/S1678-77572009000300010
Abstract: objective: to test the hypothesis that the quality of the dentinal sealing provided by two-step etch-and-rinse adhesives cannot be altered by the addition of an extra layer of the respective adhesive or the application of a more hydrophobic, non-solvated resin. material and methods: full-crown preparations were acid-etched with phosphoric acid for 15 s and bonded with adper single bond (3m espe), excite dsc (ivoclar/vivadent) or prime & bond nt (dentsply). the adhesives were used according to the manufacturers' instructions (control groups) or after application to dentin they were a) covered with an extra coat of each respective system or b) coated with a non-solvated bonding agent (adper scotchbond multi-purpose adhesive, 3m espe). fluid flow rate was measured before and after dentin surfaces were acid-etched and bonded with adhesives. results: none of the adhesives or experimental treatments was capable to block completely the fluid transudation across the treated dentin. application of an extra coat of the adhesive did not reduce the fluid flow rate of adhesive-bonded dentin (p>0.05). conversely, the application of a more hydrophobic non-solvated resin resulted in significant reductions in the fluid flow rate (p<0.05) for all tested adhesives. conclusions: the quality of the dentinal sealing provided by etch-and-rinse adhesives can be significantly improved by the application of a more hydrophobic, non-solvated bonding agent.
Marginal Sealing Durability of Two Contemporary Self-Etch Adhesives  [cached]
Maryam Khoroushi,Mahsa Mansoori
ISRN Dentistry , 2012, DOI: 10.5402/2012/204813
Comparative evaluation of tensile bond strengths of total-etch adhesives and self-etch adhesives with single and multiple consecutive applications: An in vitro study
Mandava Deepthi,Ajitha P,Narayanan L
Journal of Conservative Dentistry , 2009,
Abstract: Aim: This study evaluates the effect of single and multiple consecutive applications of adhesives on the tensile bond strength. The currently available adhesives follow either the total-etch or the self-etch concept. However, in both techniques the uniformity and thickness of the adhesive layer plays a significant role in the development of a good bond. Materials and Methods: Sixty composite-dentin bonded specimens were prepared using a total-etch adhesive (Gluma) and another 60 using a self-etch adhesive (AdheSE). Each group was further divided into six subgroups based on the number of applications, i.e., single application and multiple (2, 3, 4, 6, and 8) applications. The tensile bond strength was tested with the Instron universal testing machine. The values were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and multiple range tests by Tukey′s HSD procedure to identify those subgroups that had significantly higher bond strength. Results: The results indicate that with total-etch adhesive the bond strength increases significantly as the number of applications are increased from one to two or from two to three", for self-etch adhesive the bond strength obtained with two applications is significantly higher than that with one application. However, for both adhesive systems, there was a decrease in the tensile bond strength values with further applications. Conclusion: We conclude that, in the clinical setting, the application of multiple coats of total etch adhesive improves bonding.
Shear bond strength of self-etch and total-etch adhesives to bovine enamel and dentin
Raposo, Carolina Carramilo;Santana, Ivone Lima;
Revista Odonto Ciência , 2012, DOI: 10.1590/S1980-65232012000200009
Abstract: purpose: to evaluate the shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive and an etch-and-rinse adhesive when bonded to bovine enamel and dentin. methods: the labial surfaces of 28 bovine mandibular incisors were wet ground to achieve a flat enamel or dentin surface. a 1-step self-etch adhesive and a 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive were bonded to enamel or dentin according to the manufacturer's instructions (adper easy one and adper scotchbond, respectively). a composite resin cylinder (filtek z350 xt) was built upon the adhesive layer using a silicon mold (2 mm in diameter × 3 mm high). the specimens were stored in 37°c distilled water for 24 h. the bond strength was measured by a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. student's t-test was used to compare bond strength values between adhesives at the 95% confidence level. results: for the enamel specimens, adper scotchbond had significantly higher values of bond strength than adper easy one (p=0.007). for the dentin specimens, there were no statistically significant differences between adhesives (p=0.12). conclusion: adper easy one showed lower shear bond strength than adper scotchbond on enamel. for dentin, adper easy one showed bond strength similar to adper scotchbond.
Comparison of nanoleakage in composite restorations following application of self-etch and total-etch adhesives in primary and permanent teeth
Makarem A,Ghavam Nassiri M,Esmaili M
Journal of Dental Medicine , 2007,
Abstract: Background and Aim: Nanoleakage can cause discoloration around restoration margins, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity and finally loss of restoration, thus adequate hybrid layer is of primary importance in prevention of nanoleakage in adhesive restorations. Because of structural differences between primary and permanent dentin, evaluation of nanoleakge in primary teeth is very important. The aim of this study was to evaluate the nanoleakage in composite restorations following application of self -etch and total-etch adhesives in primary and permanent teeth. Materials and Methods: In this experimental study, Cl V cavities were prepared in buccal surfaces of 20 extracted primary molars and 20 extracted premolars. Each group was divided into 2 subgroups: In group (A), Gluma One Bond and in group (B), iBond adhesive materials were applied. After silver nitrate staining, specimens were mesiodistally sectioned and polished and then SEM examination was carried out to measure the nanoleakage .Data were analyzed statistically using, ANOVA and Duncan tests with p<0.05 as the limit of significance. Results: Factors tested had no significant effect on each other. Primary teeth showed more nanoleakage than permanent teeth (P<0.05). Mean nanoleakage was significantly higher in cervical than occlusal margins (P<0.05) and also in iBond than in Gluma One Bond in primary teeth (P<0.05). In permanent teeth, the lowest nanoleakage was observed in Gluma One Bond. Conclusion: The result of this study indicates that the use of total etch dentin adhesives (Gluma One Bond) in bonded restorations results in less nanoleakage in primary and permanent teeth.
Microleakage after Thermocycling of Three Self-Etch Adhesives under Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Restorations  [PDF]
Sabine O. Geerts,Laurence Seidel,Adelin I. Albert,Audrey M. Gueders
International Journal of Dentistry , 2010, DOI: 10.1155/2010/728453
Abstract: This study was designed to evaluate microleakage that appeared on Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) restorations. Sixty class V cavities ( ) were cut on thirty extracted third molars, which were randomly allocated to three experimental groups. All the buccal cavities were pretreated with polyacrylic acid, whereas the lingual cavities were treated with three one-step Self-Etch adhesives, respectively, Xeno III (Dentsply Detrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), iBond exp (Heraeus Kulzer gmbH & Co. KG, Hanau, Germany), and Adper Prompt-L-Pop (3M ESPE AG, Dental products Seefeld, Germany). All cavities were completely filled with RMGIC, teeth were thermocycled for 800 cycles, and leakage was evaluated. Results were expressed as means standard deviations (SDs). Microleakage scores were analysed by means of generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) assuming an ordinal logistic link function. All results were considered to be significant at the 5% critical level ( ). The results showed that bonding RMGIC to dentin with a Self-Etch adhesive rather than using polyacrylic acid did not influence microleakage scores ( ), except for one tested Self-Etch adhesive, namely, Xeno III ( ). Nevertheless, our results did not show any significant difference between the three tested Self-Etch adhesive systems. In conclusion, the pretreatment of dentin with Self-Etch adhesive system, before RMGIC filling, seems to be an alternative to the conventional Dentin Conditioner for the clinicians as suggested by our results (thermocycling) and others (microtensile tests). 1. Introduction Improvements in the techniques of adhesive dentistry have allowed the use of minimal invasive cavities and aesthetic fillings. During the past few years, adhesive bonding systems have submitted major developments and the durability of adhesive restorations has continually grown [1]. Resin-composites and Glass Ionomer Cements (GICs) have also been considerably improved in their aesthetic and mechanical properties. Moreover, in the long term, composites have demonstrated better mechanical performances and surface integrity than GICs or Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cements (RMGICs) [2–5]. In addition, composites are more aesthetic and polish better than GICs or RMGICs. Nevertheless, RMGICs show many advantages [6, 7]. Firstly, RMGICs allow an optimal sealing on the marginal join by a quasitotal lack of microleakage [4, 8, 9]. Secondly, this material (RMGIC) is more tolerant to moisture than resin composites, and thus, it does not require a rubber dam [10–13]. Thirdly, its use is reported with very few
Microleakage of Total-etch and Self-etch adhesives in class V composite cavities
Shadman N,Farzin Ebrahimi Sh,Molaie N
Journal of Dental Medicine , 2011,
Abstract: "nBackground and Aims: This ex vivo study was done to evaluate the effect of different adhesive systems on microleakage of class V composite restorations."nMaterials and Methods: Thirty extracted human third molar teeth were selected and class V cavities were prepared (3×3×1.5 mm) on buccal and lingual surfaces. Then, teeth were divided into 3 groups. Adhesives used in this study were Excite (Ivoclar/Vivadent), AdheSE(Ivoclar/Vivadent) and AdheSE-one Ivoclar (Vivadent/Vivadent). After application of adhesives, cavities were restored with a resine composite (InTen-S A1/ Ivoclar), in 3 increments and cured with QTH light curing unit (700 mW/cm). After 24 hours storage of teeth in 370C water, teeth were thermocycled (500 cycles in 5-550C) and stored in 1% basic fushin for 24 hours. After that, the specimens were rinsed with running water and mounted in a self-cured acryl. Finally, the specimens were sectioned and maximum depth of dye penetration for each restoration was measured using stereomicroscopy. The results were statistically analyzed with Mann-Whitney U test."nResults: In comparison between enamel and dentin margins in each group, microleakage in enamel margins were less than that of dentin margins. This difference was statistically significant in Excite and AdheSE-one groups (P=0.001, P=0.043). AdheSE showed the least microleakage in dentin margins; however, there was no significant difference between 3 bonding agents (P=0.14). In enamel margins, there were significant differences between 3 bonding agents (P=0.001). Excite showed the lowest microleakage and AdheSE-one had the highest microleakage."nConclusion: The least enamel microleakage was associated with the total-etch and least dentin microleakage was observed in the two-step self-etch adhesive system.
Heat radiation vs air drying to remove interfacial water from self-etch adhesives  [cached]
Mathews Irene,Arathi G,Balagopal S
Indian Journal of Dental Research , 2008,
Abstract: The clinician′s quest for time-saving and technique-insensitive technology has led to the development of simplified self-etch adhesives that are predominantly water or solvent based. Several studies have shown that conventional air-drying procedures are incapable of eliminating all the residual water in the adhesive and that it may even cause collapse of the underlying collagen matrix. We hypothesized that heat from a light source may be effective in removing water from these adhesives. The aim of this study was, therefore, to evaluate the effectiveness of heat vs conventional air drying in eliminating water droplets from self-etch adhesive. A self-etch adhesive was applied to bur-cut dentin surfaces, which were then allotted to one of two treatment procedures for eliminating residual water from the adhesive: conventional air drying or the experimental heat application. Specimens were then prepared and analyzed using SEM. Specimens in the experimental group showed no evidence of water treeing within the adhesive layer. Thus, it was concluded that heat radiation was an effective method to remove residual water from simplified adhesives.
Page 1 /100
Display every page Item

Copyright © 2008-2017 Open Access Library. All rights reserved.