Effect of different bonding strategies on adhesion to deep and superficial permanent dentin.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effect of different bonding strategies on the microtensile bond strength to deep and superficial permanent dentin.


METHODS
Forty-eight teeth were randomly flattened according to the dentin depth: superficial dentin (SD) and deep dentin (DD). Subsequently, three adhesive systems were applied (n=8): an etch-and-rinse (Adper Single Bond 2 - SB), a "mild" two-step self-etching (Clearfil SE Bond - SE) and a one-step self-etching adhesive system (Futurabond - FB). Each specimen was restored with a composite resin and sectioned into 1.0-mm(2) thick slabs. After 24 hours, resin-dentin sticks were submitted to tensile stress in a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). Data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at a level of 0.05%.


RESULTS
Superficial dentin showed the highest microtensile bond strength values, which differed statistically from those obtained in the deep dentin, irrespective of the adhesive system used. FB yielded the highest bond strength values, which were statistically similar to the bond strength values of SE, but statistically different from those obtained when the SB adhesive was used.


CONCLUSIONS
Bond strength obtained in superficial dentin was significantly higher than in deep dentin, for all adhesive systems tested. Adhesion was affected by the different bonding strategies: the one-step, low pH, acetone-based self-etching adhesive promoted the higher bond strength values, which were statistically similar to those obtained with the two-step, water-based self-etching adhesive.
Pegado
Rafael Eduardo Fernandes
RE
DDS, Faculdade de Odontologia e Centro de Pesquisas Odontológicas São Leopoldo Mandic, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
do Amaral
Flávia Lucisano Botelho
FL
Flório
Flávia Martão
FM
Basting
Roberta Tarkany
RT
Am J Dent. 2000 Nov;13(Spec No):25D-30D
11763914
Oper Dent. 2007 Mar-Apr;32(2):133-7
17427821
Scanning Microsc. 1989 Mar;3(1):161-74; discussion 174-6
2662395
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2006 Jun;27(6):340-5; quiz 346
16792342
Am J Dent. 1993 Feb;6(1):7-9
8329167
J Dent Res. 2000 Jul;79(7):1458-63
11005728
Int Dent J. 1985 Jun;35(2):145-54
3894241
J Dent Res. 2004 Jun;83(6):454-8
15153451
J Biomed Mater Res. 1993 Aug;27(8):975-81
8408125
J Dent. 1997 Nov;25(6):441-58
9604576
J Dent. 2008 Feb;36(2):163-9
18248872
J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Dec;66(6):777-81
1805028
Arch Oral Biol. 1976;21(6):355-62
1066114
Dent Mater. 1990 Jan;6(1):45-50
2198182
J Adhes Dent. 2006 Dec;8(6):367-73
17243593
Biomaterials. 2007 Sep;28(26):3757-85
17543382
Am J Dent. 2003 Oct;16(5):292-8
14677606
J Dent Res. 2005 Feb;84(2):118-32
15668328
Dent Mater. 1993 Jan;9(1):19-22
8299863
Oper Dent. 2003 May-Jun;28(3):215-35
12760693