IADR Abstract Archives
Effect of Application-mode/Curing-protocol on SBS of a Universal Adhesive
Objectives: To evaluate the effect of different application modes and curing protocols of a universal adhesive on shear bond strength (SBS) of a dual-cured core build-up resin composite material to bovine dentin.
Methods: In total, sixty-bovine anterior teeth were used. Subsequent to root removal, the cervical 1/3 of all labial enamel surfaces were wet ground (#180 SiC papers) to expose flat dentin surfaces. Standardized smear layer was created by wet grinding (30s) each dentin surface (#600 SiC paper). The teeth were then randomly assigned into 6 groups (n=10/group), according to the two experimental factors investigated, Factor 1: Application mode, 3 groups [Self-etching mode (SE), etch-and-rinse wet (E&RW), and etch-and-rinse dry (E&RD)] and Factor 2: curing protocol, 2 groups [light-curing protocol (LC) and dual-curing protocol (DC)]. Adhesive (One Coat 7 Universal, Colten Whaledent AG, Switzerland) was applied to detin according to its manufacturer instructions and light cured, (Elipar, 3M ESPE, USA, 1200 mW/cm2, 10s). Each tooth received one 2mmx2mm dual-cured resin composite cylinder (Paracore, Colten Whaledent AG, Switzerland). Shear bond strength was run at a crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min. Fracture modes were evaluated using digital microscope (Scopecom, digital microscope, Changzhou, China) under 50X. Statistical analysis was performed using Two-Way ANOVA/Tukey HSD/student t-test (P=0.05).
Results: Factors “curing protocol” and “application mode x curing protocol” showed significant effect on SBS (P=0.020 and P=0.002 respectively). However, factor “application mode” had no significant effect on SBS (P=0.525). Within each application mode, LC(17.5±4.6MPa)=DC (20.6±6.8MPa), LC(26.1±8.2MPa)>DC(15.6±4.1MPa) and LC (20.8±5.3MPa)=DC(17.3±4.3MPa) for SE, E&RW and E&RD application modes respectively. Within each curing protocol, E&RW(26.1±8.2MPa)≥E&RD (20.8±5.3MPa)=SE(17.5±4.6MPa) and SE(20.6±6.8MPa)=E&RW(15.6±4.1MPa)=E&RD(17.3±4.3MPa) for LC and DC curing protocols respectively. Mixed failure (55%), adhesive failure (43.3%). Cohesive failure (1.7%).
Conclusions: The use of the DC activator seemed to be unnecessary. When the adhesive was light cured, the use of etch-and-rinse wet application mode improved SBS compared to self-etching mode.
Methods: In total, sixty-bovine anterior teeth were used. Subsequent to root removal, the cervical 1/3 of all labial enamel surfaces were wet ground (#180 SiC papers) to expose flat dentin surfaces. Standardized smear layer was created by wet grinding (30s) each dentin surface (#600 SiC paper). The teeth were then randomly assigned into 6 groups (n=10/group), according to the two experimental factors investigated, Factor 1: Application mode, 3 groups [Self-etching mode (SE), etch-and-rinse wet (E&RW), and etch-and-rinse dry (E&RD)] and Factor 2: curing protocol, 2 groups [light-curing protocol (LC) and dual-curing protocol (DC)]. Adhesive (One Coat 7 Universal, Colten Whaledent AG, Switzerland) was applied to detin according to its manufacturer instructions and light cured, (Elipar, 3M ESPE, USA, 1200 mW/cm2, 10s). Each tooth received one 2mmx2mm dual-cured resin composite cylinder (Paracore, Colten Whaledent AG, Switzerland). Shear bond strength was run at a crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min. Fracture modes were evaluated using digital microscope (Scopecom, digital microscope, Changzhou, China) under 50X. Statistical analysis was performed using Two-Way ANOVA/Tukey HSD/student t-test (P=0.05).
Results: Factors “curing protocol” and “application mode x curing protocol” showed significant effect on SBS (P=0.020 and P=0.002 respectively). However, factor “application mode” had no significant effect on SBS (P=0.525). Within each application mode, LC(17.5±4.6MPa)=DC (20.6±6.8MPa), LC(26.1±8.2MPa)>DC(15.6±4.1MPa) and LC (20.8±5.3MPa)=DC(17.3±4.3MPa) for SE, E&RW and E&RD application modes respectively. Within each curing protocol, E&RW(26.1±8.2MPa)≥E&RD (20.8±5.3MPa)=SE(17.5±4.6MPa) and SE(20.6±6.8MPa)=E&RW(15.6±4.1MPa)=E&RD(17.3±4.3MPa) for LC and DC curing protocols respectively. Mixed failure (55%), adhesive failure (43.3%). Cohesive failure (1.7%).
Conclusions: The use of the DC activator seemed to be unnecessary. When the adhesive was light cured, the use of etch-and-rinse wet application mode improved SBS compared to self-etching mode.