Adhesion to root canal dentine using one and two-step adhesives with dual-cure composite core materials.
The regional tensile bond strengths of two dual-cure composite resin core materials to root canal dentine using either a one or two-step self-etching adhesive were evaluated. Extracted premolar teeth were decoronated and their root canals prepared to a depth of 8 mm and a width of 1.4 mm. In one group, a one-step self-etching adhesive (Unifil Self-etching Bond) was applied to the walls of the post-space and light-cured for 10 s. After which, the post-spaces were filled with the a dual-cure composite resin (Unifil Core) and then half the specimens were light-cured for 60 s and the other half placed in darkness for 30 min. In the second group, a self-etching primer (ED Primer II) was applied for 30 s, followed by an adhesive resin (Clearfil Photo Bond), which was light-cured for 10 s. The post-spaces were filled with a dual-cure composite resin (DC Core) and then half the specimens were light-cured for 60 s and the other half placed in darkness for 30 min. Chemical-cure composite resin was placed on the outer surfaces of all the roots, which were then stored in water for 24 h. They were serially sliced perpendicular to the bonded interface into 8, 0.6 mm-thick slabs, and then transversely sectioned into beams, approximately 8 x 0.6 x 0.6 mm, for the microtensile bond strength test (muTBS). Data were divided into two (coronal/apical half of post-space) and analysed using three-way anova and Scheffe's test (P < 0.05). Failure modes were observed under an scanning electron microscope (SEM) and statistically analysed. Specimens for observation of the bonded interfaces were prepared in a similar manner as for bond strength testing, cut in half and embedded in epoxy resin. They were then polished to a high gloss, gold sputter coated, and after argon ion etching, observed under an SEM. For both dual-cure composite resins and curing strategies, there were no significant differences in muTBS between the coronal and apical regions (P > 0.05). In addition, both dual-cure composite resins exhibited no significant differences in muTBS irrespective of whether polymerization was chemically or photoinitiated (P > 0.05). Both dual-cure composite resins exhibited good bonding to root canal dentin, which was not dependent upon region or mode of polymerization.
Foxton
R M
RM
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Floor 25, Guy's, King's and St Thomas' Dental Institute, Kings College London, Tower, London Bridge, London SE1-9RT, UK. richard.foxton@kcl.ac.uk
Nakajima
M
M
Tagami
J
J
Miura
H
H
D001641:Bicuspid / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D001840:Dental Bonding / Q000379:methods; D003804:Dentin; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry*; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing / Q000379:methods; D008689:Methacrylates; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry*; D012390:Root Canal Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D013718:Tensile Strength
C469237:Clearfil Core; D003188:Composite Resins; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C500742:ED Primer II; D008689:Methacrylates; D019279:Resin Cements; C407402:Unifil Bond; C500741:Unifil Core; C074669:Clearfil Photo Bond