Sealing ability and bond strength of four contemporary adhesives to enamel and to dentine.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the shear bond strength and microleakage of four adhesive systems to the enamel and dentine of primary bovine teeth.


METHODS
120 bovine primary mandibular incisors were collected and stored in an aqueous 1% chloramine solution at room temperature for no longer than 3 months after extraction (80 for shear bond testing and 40 for microleakage evaluation). The adhesives tested were Clearfil SE bond (SE), Adper Prompt L Pop (LP), Xeno III (XE), and Prime and Bond NT (PB). For shear bond strength testing the specimens were wet ground to 600 grit SiC paper to expose a flat enamel or dentine surface. After bonding and restoration with Dyract AP (DAP), the teeth were subjected to shear stress using a universal testing machine. For microleakage evaluation, facial class V cavities were prepared half in enamel and half in cementum. All cavities were restored with DAP. After thermocycling and immersion in 2% methylene blue, the dye penetration was evaluated under a stereomicroscope.


METHODS
All data were analysed by Chi-square tests or Fisher's tests when adapted in order to determine the significant differences between groups. Results were considered as significant for p < 0.05. Results were analysed with an ANOVA test and a Bonferroni's multiple comparison. The level of significance was p < 0.05.


RESULTS
Shear bond strength values (MPa,) ranged from: on enamel 11.06 to 5.34, in decreasing order SE, LP, XE and PB and on dentine 10.47 to 4.74, in decreasing order SE, XE, LP and PB. Differences in bond strengths between the four systems on enamel and dentine were all statistically significant, excepted for XE vs LP (shear bond at dentine). No significant differences were recorded in the microleakage degree between the four adhesive systems on enamel and on dentine (p > 0.0.5).


CONCLUSIONS
The highest shear bond strength was achieved by Clearfil SE bond and the lowest by Prime and Bond NT. There was no significant difference concerning the sealing ability of the four adhesive systems.
Atash
R
R
Department of Adult and Paediatric Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium. atash_ramin@yahoo.fr
Vanden Abbeele
A
A
D000818:Animals; D002417:Cattle; D004396:Coloring Agents; D020770:Compomers / Q000737:chemistry; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation / Q000145:classification; D003739:Dental Cementum / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003743:Dental Enamel / Q000648:ultrastructure*; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000145:classification; D003804:Dentin / Q000648:ultrastructure*; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry*; D008422:Materials Testing; D008751:Methylene Blue; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids / Q000737:chemistry; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry*; D033081:Shear Strength; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D013499:Surface Properties; D014094:Tooth, Deciduous
C438313:Clearfil SE Bond; D004396:Coloring Agents; D020770:Compomers; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C088486:Dyract; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; C425843:Prime and Bond NT; C408584:Prompt L-Pop; D019279:Resin Cements; C487957:Xeno III; D008751:Methylene Blue