Does hybridized dentin affect bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement?

Evaluate the influence of different hybridization bonding techniques of a self-adhesive resin cement. 30 human health molars were divided into six groups (n=10). The specimens received three longitudinal sections, allowing insertion of central cuts in PVC matrices. Each group received a different de...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry 2016-10, Vol.8 (4), p.e409-e414
Hauptverfasser: Pamato, Saulo, do Valle, Accácio-Lins, de Andrade, Gustavo-Henrique-Barbosa, Vidotti, Hugo-Alberto, Só, Marcus-Vinícius-Reis, Pereira, Jefferson-Ricardo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Evaluate the influence of different hybridization bonding techniques of a self-adhesive resin cement. 30 human health molars were divided into six groups (n=10). The specimens received three longitudinal sections, allowing insertion of central cuts in PVC matrices. Each group received a different dentin pretreatment according to the manufacturer's recommendations, except the control group (G1), as follows. G2 - a 3-step total-etch adhesive system (Optibond™ FL, Kerr); G3 - a 3-step total-etch adhesive system (Adper™ Scotchbond™ Multi-Purpose, 3M ESPE); G4 - a 2-step total-etch adhesive system (Adper™ Single Bond 2, 3M ESPE); G5 - a single-step self-etching system (Bond Force, Tokuyama); and G6 - universal bonding system (Single Bond Universal, 3M ESPE). Then, cylinders made of self-adhesive resin cement with polypropylene matrix was cemented in all groups (RelyX U200, 3M ESPE). Bond strength was assessed by submitting the specimens to micro-shear test and was characterized according to the fracture pattern observed through optical microscopy. The results were submitted to the Kruskal-Wallis test, which indicated a statistically significant difference between the groups ( =0.04), and Tukey's multiple comparisons, which indicated a statistically significant difference between G1 and G3 (
ISSN:1989-5488
1989-5488
DOI:10.4317/jced.52980