Influence of the substrate and load application method on the shear bond strength of two adhesive systems.
The difficulty with comparing data obtained from different research centers calls for the standardization of laboratory procedures. This in vitro study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) of two adhesive systems--a self-etching system, Etch&Prime 3.0 and a one-bottle total-etch system, Single Bond--using two methods of load application (orthodontic edge wire loop and knife-edge blade). The hypothesis of substrate influence on the results obtained for both tests was also investigated. Twenty-four recently extracted human teeth were embedded in PVC tubes using acrylic resin and divided into two groups (n=12). A proximal surface of each tooth was wet-ground flat to expose dentin. Etch&Prime 3.0 and Single Bond adhesive systems were applied according to the manufacturers' instructions, and cone-shaped restorations were then built using Z100 resin composite. After storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, the specimens were submitted to SBS testing using an orthodontic edge wire loop. The same teeth were again embedded in PVC tubes using acrylic resin and the other proximal surface was wet-ground flat to expose dentin. The specimens were prepared as explained above, and after storage in distilled water under the same previous conditions, they were submitted to SBS testing using a knife-edge blade. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests were performed to determine any statistically significant differences among testing conditions. Results indicated that SBS values obtained for Etch&Prime 3.0 were significantly lower than Single Bond for both methods of load application (p<0.001). Regarding the load application method, statistically significant higher values (p<0.01) were obtained for Etch&Prime 3.0 when the knife-edge blade was used, whereas, no significant difference was observed between the two methods for Single Bond. There was a significant correlation between the bond strength values obtained on the same tooth (p<0.05). SEM examination found that Etch&Prime 3.0 demonstrated narrower tags than Single Bond. Moreover, the peritubular dentin was not adequately decalcified when Etch&Prime 3.0 was used.
Cardoso
Paulo Eduardo Capel
PE
Department of Dental Materials, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. paulocapel@uol.com.br
Meloncini
Marco Antônio
MA
Placido
Eliane
E
Lima
Janaína De Oliveira
Jde O
Tavares
Andréa Urbano
AU
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D003188:Composite Resins; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis / Q000379:methods*; D003804:Dentin / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003806:Dentin Permeability; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D000431:Ethanol; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing / Q000379:methods; D008689:Methacrylates; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D008963:Molar; D010710:Phosphates; D011897:Random Allocation; D019279:Resin Cements; D033081:Shear Strength; D012822:Silicon Dioxide; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D015040:Zirconium
D003188:Composite Resins; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C469823:Etch&Prime 3.0; D008689:Methacrylates; D010710:Phosphates; D019279:Resin Cements; C083568:Z100 composite resin; C115612:single bond; D000431:Ethanol; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D012822:Silicon Dioxide; D015040:Zirconium