Bonding Performance of Recent All-in-one Adhesive Systems to Cervical Tooth-substance

Objectives: To examine the bonding performance of four recent multiple-use all-in-one adhesive systems to three types of cervical-tooth-substance. The difference in bonding-behavior among cervical tooth-substances was also investigated.
Methods: Two pretreatment-time prescribed all-in-one adhesive systems; an experimental adhesive(XTE, 3M ESPE) and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive(SBU, 3M ESPE), and two zero-pretreatment-time all-in-one systems; G-Premio BOND(GPB, GC) and Clearfil Universal Bond Quick(UBQ, Kuraray Noritake Dental) were used. Cervical abrasion-lesion-dentin(ALD) of 32 extracted-human-premolars was cleaned with a low-speed-rotated polishing-brush and water. Standardized V-shaped buccocervical cavity consisting of a gingival sound-dentin-wall(SD) and an occlusal-dentin-wall with beveled sound-enamel(SE) was prepared in 32 intact-premolars. The surfaces of ADL and both SD and SE(as control) were pretreated with each system according to the manufacturer instructions. The immediate-tensile-bond-strength(ITBS) of the systems to ALD, SD and SE were measured(n=8). The data were examined using ANOVA, Tukey’s q-test and Weibull analysis.
Results: The mean ITBS(SD) in MPa to ALD/SD/SE were XTE;26.5(8.2)/29.0(8.8)/24.0(8.4), SBU;24.6(6.0)/26.5(5.9)/24.3(5.1), GPB;23.2(7.3)/22.3(5.5)/17.9(7.0), UBQ; 22.4(5.5)/27.1(4.6)/24.9(5.3). The type of cervical-tooth-substance did not influence the ITBS-value, but the system difference affected the value. The ITBS of XTE to the cervical-tooth-substances was significantly greater than the value of GPB(p<0.05). Weibull modulus and the stress-value in MPa for 10% probability of failure[PF10] were XTE;<3.6>[15.6], SBU;<4.9>[17.2], GPB;<3.4>[12.2], UBQ:<5.3>[17.6]. Those values of three cervical-tooth-substances were ALD; <4.0>[15.2], SD;<4.6>[17.6] and SE;<3.8>[13.9]. The Wm and PF10-values of XTE, SBU and UBQ were significantly greater(p<0.05) than or similar to the values of GPB. In comparison with SE, ALD indicated similar value for Wm-value and demonstrated significantly greater value for PF10-value.
Conclusions: For the bonding performance focused on ITBS, Wm(bonding reliability) and PF10(bonding durability), XTE, SBU and UBQ were superior or similar to GPB. The bonding reliability of ALD was similar to that of SE and the bonding durability of ALD was superior to SE.