IADR Abstract Archives
Bond Strength of Pure Ormocer x Methacryate Composites to Enamel/Dentin
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of composite composition in relation to its main monomer (pure Ormocer x Methacrylate) on bond strength to enamel and dentin of methacrylate based single component self-etching adhesives.
Methods: Eighty bovine incisors were divided into two groups, according to the kind of substrate to be tested (enamel – n=40; dentin – n=40). A flat enamel or dentin surface was created on buccal surfaces with a P400-SiC sandpaper. The specimens were embedded in acrylic resin and the smear layer was standardized using P600-SiC sandpaper. For each substrate, the specimens were divided into two groups (n=20), according to the kind of universal self-etching adhesive applied: FUT – Futurabond M+ (Voco), SCOTCH – Scotchbond Universal (3M/Espe). The adhesive systems were actively applied according to manufactures´ instructions. Each group was divided into two subgroups (n=10), according to kind of composite applied over the bonding layer: ORMO – pure Ormocer composite Ormofil (Voco), Z350 –methacrylate based composite Z350 (3M/Espe). The specimens were sectioned to obtain bonded sticks with a cross-sectional area of approximately 1 mm2. Each bonded stick was submitted to a microtensile test at a cross-speed of 1mm/min. The data from enamel and dentin samples were analyzed separately using one-way ANOVA.
Results: The results of ANOVA for enamel (p=0.9740) and dentin (p=0.8625) substrates showed non-significant differences. The means of bond strength for each group/subgroup were: ENAMEL - FUT/ORMO (30.04±5.22), FUT/Z350 (31.03±6.04), SCOTCH/ORMO (30.30±4.78), SCOTCH/Z350 (30.96±6.61). DENTIN - FUT/ORMO (23.82±3.62), FUT/Z350 (22.81±2.79), SCOTCH/ORMO (23.27±2.80), SCOTCH/Z350 (23.78±2.82).
Conclusions: The use of composites with different chemical composition did not significantly change the bond strength to enamel or dentin for both adhesives tested. There were non-significant differences between Futurabond M+ and Scotchbond Universal, both for enamel and dentin substrates.
Methods: Eighty bovine incisors were divided into two groups, according to the kind of substrate to be tested (enamel – n=40; dentin – n=40). A flat enamel or dentin surface was created on buccal surfaces with a P400-SiC sandpaper. The specimens were embedded in acrylic resin and the smear layer was standardized using P600-SiC sandpaper. For each substrate, the specimens were divided into two groups (n=20), according to the kind of universal self-etching adhesive applied: FUT – Futurabond M+ (Voco), SCOTCH – Scotchbond Universal (3M/Espe). The adhesive systems were actively applied according to manufactures´ instructions. Each group was divided into two subgroups (n=10), according to kind of composite applied over the bonding layer: ORMO – pure Ormocer composite Ormofil (Voco), Z350 –methacrylate based composite Z350 (3M/Espe). The specimens were sectioned to obtain bonded sticks with a cross-sectional area of approximately 1 mm2. Each bonded stick was submitted to a microtensile test at a cross-speed of 1mm/min. The data from enamel and dentin samples were analyzed separately using one-way ANOVA.
Results: The results of ANOVA for enamel (p=0.9740) and dentin (p=0.8625) substrates showed non-significant differences. The means of bond strength for each group/subgroup were: ENAMEL - FUT/ORMO (30.04±5.22), FUT/Z350 (31.03±6.04), SCOTCH/ORMO (30.30±4.78), SCOTCH/Z350 (30.96±6.61). DENTIN - FUT/ORMO (23.82±3.62), FUT/Z350 (22.81±2.79), SCOTCH/ORMO (23.27±2.80), SCOTCH/Z350 (23.78±2.82).
Conclusions: The use of composites with different chemical composition did not significantly change the bond strength to enamel or dentin for both adhesives tested. There were non-significant differences between Futurabond M+ and Scotchbond Universal, both for enamel and dentin substrates.