IADR Abstract Archives
Wide Variation of Tooth Bond Strengths Among Universal Adhesive Brands
Objectives: Observe evidence of formulation variation among multiple restorative adhesive brands – indicated by manufacturer for use in both direct and indirect restorations (typically labeled “universal”) – by measuring initial 24-hour bond strength to both cut enamel and dentin substrates.
Methods: Thirteen recently-developed universal adhesive brands were chosen for testing: Clearfil Universal Bond Quick by Kuraray Noritake Dental (CU); Connexio by Centrix (CO); E-On Universal Bond by Benco Dental (EU); Ecosite Bond by DMG America (EB); G-Premio Bond by GC America (GB); MPa Max by Clinician's Choice (MM); One Coat 7 Universal by Coltene (OC); OptiBond Universal by Kerr (OU); Parkell Universal Adhesive by Parkell (PU); Prelude One by Zest Dental Solutions (PO); SeptoBond by Septodont (SE); Superb Universal Adhesive by Apex Dental (SU); and Tokuyama Universal Bond by Tokuyama Dental (TU). Two additional universal adhesives with longer availability on market chosen as study controls: Scotchbond Universal by 3M (SB); and Clearfil SE Bond 2 by Kuraray Noritake Dental (CS). Extracted human third molars disinfected with 0.5% chloramine-T sectioned and embedded in acrylic (Bosworth Fastray) — half with exposed dentin and the other half of samples with cut enamel exposed. Notched-edge shear bond strength method (Ultradent) employed, using direct resin composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra by 3M). Samples stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hrs, tested to failure with universal testing machine (Instron); loading rate 1 mm/min.
Results: See table of results
Conclusions: Bond strengths varied much by brand, inferring wide formulation variation. Dentin bonds generally higher than enamel, although multiple studies show widespread dentin bond depreciation clinically. TU had greatest difference between dentin and enamel bond; researchers of this study believe tooth storage medium and/or exclusive self-cure of product could be factors, subject to future research. None of thirteen adhesives tested statistically superior to both controls for either dentin or enamel bond.
Methods: Thirteen recently-developed universal adhesive brands were chosen for testing: Clearfil Universal Bond Quick by Kuraray Noritake Dental (CU); Connexio by Centrix (CO); E-On Universal Bond by Benco Dental (EU); Ecosite Bond by DMG America (EB); G-Premio Bond by GC America (GB); MPa Max by Clinician's Choice (MM); One Coat 7 Universal by Coltene (OC); OptiBond Universal by Kerr (OU); Parkell Universal Adhesive by Parkell (PU); Prelude One by Zest Dental Solutions (PO); SeptoBond by Septodont (SE); Superb Universal Adhesive by Apex Dental (SU); and Tokuyama Universal Bond by Tokuyama Dental (TU). Two additional universal adhesives with longer availability on market chosen as study controls: Scotchbond Universal by 3M (SB); and Clearfil SE Bond 2 by Kuraray Noritake Dental (CS). Extracted human third molars disinfected with 0.5% chloramine-T sectioned and embedded in acrylic (Bosworth Fastray) — half with exposed dentin and the other half of samples with cut enamel exposed. Notched-edge shear bond strength method (Ultradent) employed, using direct resin composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra by 3M). Samples stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hrs, tested to failure with universal testing machine (Instron); loading rate 1 mm/min.
Results: See table of results
Conclusions: Bond strengths varied much by brand, inferring wide formulation variation. Dentin bonds generally higher than enamel, although multiple studies show widespread dentin bond depreciation clinically. TU had greatest difference between dentin and enamel bond; researchers of this study believe tooth storage medium and/or exclusive self-cure of product could be factors, subject to future research. None of thirteen adhesives tested statistically superior to both controls for either dentin or enamel bond.
IMAGES
3187025_File000000.jpg
3187025_File000000.jpg