Publication:
A comparison of microtensile bond strengths of several dentin bonding systems to primary and permanent dentin

dc.contributor.authorBurrow M.F.
dc.contributor.authorNopnakeepong U.
dc.contributor.authorPhrukkanon S.
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-05T04:33:05Z
dc.date.available2021-04-05T04:33:05Z
dc.date.issued2002
dc.date.issuedBE2545
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Limited information exists with regard to the adhesive ability of glass ionomer cements (GIC) and recently developed resin-based dentin bond systems to primary dentin. The aim of this study was to compare the microtensile bond strength of a conventional GIC (Fuji IX), a resin-modified GIC (Fuji II LC), and two resin-based dentin adhesives (Prime and Bond NT with NRC and Single Bond). The bonded interfaces were also observed using field emission electron microscopy(FE-SEM). Methods: Microtensile bond test specimens were prepared on superficial dentin of primary and permanent molars. The specimens were bonded according to each manufacturer's instructions except for Prime and Bond NT/NRC which used Silux Plus resin composite instead of Dyract. Hour-glass shaped specimens were created (diameter of 1.2±0.02mm) and stressed in tension at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and LSD test, fracture modes were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test and Kruskall-Wallis test. Twelve specimens were prepared for each material on primary and permanent dentin. Samples were prepared in the same manner, then critical point dried, fractured and sputter-coated for the FE-SEM observations. Results: Two-way ANOVA showed the overall bond strengths were greater for the permanent dentin compared with primary dentin. However, for individual material comparisons no differences among the bond strengths to primary and permanent dentin for Fuji IX (9.7, 12.2MPa), Fuji II LC (16, 20.1MPa), Prime & Bond NT/NRC (18.1, 21.6MPa) and Single Bond (18.2, 21.6MPa), were detected. However, Fuji IX bond strengths were significantly lower than the other systems tested when bonded to either primary or permanent dentin (p<0.05). Failure mode showed cohesive failure of GIC and mostly adhesive failure for the resin-based adhesives. The FE-SEM observations showed hybrid-like layer formation for the GIC materials and hybrid layer formation for the resin-based adhesives. Significance: The materials tested would be suitable for bonding to either primary or permanent dentin, but the resin-modified GIC or resin-based systems are likely to provide a stronger bond than the conventional GIC, Fuji IX. © 2002 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.citationDental Materials. Vol 18, No.3 (2002), p.239-245
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00041-0
dc.identifier.issn1095641
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-0036582511
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14740/6732
dc.rights.holderมหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ
dc.subject.otherAdhesives
dc.subject.otherBond strength (materials)
dc.subject.otherBonding
dc.subject.otherDental cement
dc.subject.otherGlass
dc.subject.otherIonomers
dc.subject.otherResins
dc.subject.otherScanning electron microscopy
dc.subject.otherTensile strength
dc.subject.otherTensile testing
dc.subject.otherDentin bonding agents
dc.subject.otherGlass ionomers
dc.subject.otherMicrotensile bond tests
dc.subject.otherPermanent dentin
dc.subject.otherPrimary dentin
dc.subject.otherDental materials
dc.subject.otherBisphenol A bis(2 hydroxypropyl) ether dimethacrylate
dc.subject.otherCompomer
dc.subject.otherDentin bonding agent
dc.subject.otherDyract
dc.subject.otherFuji II LC cement
dc.subject.otherFuji IX
dc.subject.otherGlass ionomer
dc.subject.otherMaleic acid derivative
dc.subject.otherMethacrylic acid derivative
dc.subject.otherNon rinse conditioner
dc.subject.otherNon-rinse conditioner
dc.subject.otherPolymethacrylic acid derivative
dc.subject.otherPrime & Bond NT
dc.subject.otherResin
dc.subject.otherResin cement
dc.subject.otherSilicate
dc.subject.otherSilux Plus
dc.subject.otherSingle bond
dc.subject.otherAnalysis of variance
dc.subject.otherArticle
dc.subject.otherChemistry
dc.subject.otherComparative study
dc.subject.otherDeciduous tooth
dc.subject.otherDental acid etching
dc.subject.otherDental bonding
dc.subject.otherDentin
dc.subject.otherHuman
dc.subject.otherMaterials testing
dc.subject.otherMolar tooth
dc.subject.otherNonparametric test
dc.subject.otherScanning electron microscopy
dc.subject.otherStatistics
dc.subject.otherSurface property
dc.subject.otherTensile strength
dc.subject.otherUltrastructure
dc.subject.otherAcid Etching, Dental
dc.subject.otherAnalysis of Variance
dc.subject.otherBisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate
dc.subject.otherCompomers
dc.subject.otherComposite Resins
dc.subject.otherDental Bonding
dc.subject.otherDentin
dc.subject.otherDentin-Bonding Agents
dc.subject.otherGlass Ionomer Cements
dc.subject.otherHumans
dc.subject.otherMaleates
dc.subject.otherMaterials Testing
dc.subject.otherMethacrylates
dc.subject.otherMicroscopy, Electron, Scanning
dc.subject.otherMolar
dc.subject.otherPolymethacrylic Acids
dc.subject.otherResin Cements
dc.subject.otherResins, Synthetic
dc.subject.otherSilicates
dc.subject.otherStatistics
dc.subject.otherStatistics, Nonparametric
dc.subject.otherSurface Properties
dc.subject.otherTensile Strength
dc.subject.otherTooth, Deciduous
dc.titleA comparison of microtensile bond strengths of several dentin bonding systems to primary and permanent dentin
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
swu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036582511&doi=10.1016%2fS0109-5641%2801%2900041-0&partnerID=40&md5=1d04d15419824de0ca9595752a0b0e7b

Files