IADR Abstract Archives
Bond Strengths to Enamel Using Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Adhesives
Objective: To determine the shear bond strength (SBS) to enamel
of comparing older etch and rinse hydrophobic adhesives to newer systems
containing hydrophilic solvents. Methods: Flat enamel bonding
sites were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 120 extracted human teeth. Z-100
composite resin was bonded to the enamel after conditioning the enamel with 34%
phosphoric using an Ultradent bonding assembly. The three step systems
(primer and adhesive applied in separate steps) were tested with both steps and
without the primer step. After 24 hours, specimens were loaded to failure at a
speed of 1 mm/min. Statistical analysis included ANOVA (and Fisher's LSD
post hoc test. Results: (in Megapascals MPa).
Adhesive | Mean (SD) SBS |
Optibond FL | 46.6 (4.9) a |
Optibond Solo Plus | 43.8 (3.1) a |
All Bond 3 | 43.7 (6.6) ab |
All Bond 3 (adhesive resin only) | 43.1 (7.3) ab |
Adper Single Bond Plus | 42.8 (4.7) ab |
Prime & Bond NT | 42.5 (5.3) ab |
Optibond FL (adhesive resin only) | 38.3 (5.4) bc |
Prisma Bond | 37.7 (5.0) bc |
Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose(adhesive resin only) | 37.2 (3.7) bc |
Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose | 35.7 (4.9) c |
Prisma Universal Bond | 35.4 (3.2) c |
Groups connected with a similar letter were statistically similar (p>0.05). Several of the newer systems employing hydrophilic solvents generated higher bond values to enamel compared to Prisma Bond and Prisma Universal Bond, two older systems. Values for Optibond Fl without the primer step were lower (p<0.05) but no significant differences were seen for All Bond 3 and Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose. Conclusions: With the exception of Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose, newer three and two step hydrophilic adhesives generated higher enamel bond strengths compared to older hydrophobic systems. Supported by the Health Future Foundation.