Objectives: To determine the microtensile bond strength of three self-adhesive resin cements and a total-etch resin cement to indirect composite restorations following different surface treatments.
Methods: Composite overlays (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE) were luted on flat dentin surfaces of extracted human third molars using the following self-adhesive resin cements: Maxcem Elite (KerrHawe), RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE) or G-Cem (GC). The total-etch resin cement RelyX ARC (3M ESPE) was used as the control group. Composite surfaces were ground with 500grit SiC paper and randomly assigned to three different surface treatments: no treatment (NOT), silane application (S) (RelyX Ceramic Primer, 3M ESPE) and silane followed by an adhesive (SA) (Adper Scotchbond 1 XT, 3M ESPE). The bonded assemblies were stored in water (24h, 37 °C) and subsequently prepared for microtensile bond strength testing (µTBS). Beams of approximately 1 mm2 were tested in tension at 1 mm/min in a universal tester (Instron 4411). Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α=0.05).
Results: Mean µTBS values are shown in the table. Same letter indicates statistically similar µTBS values. A significant influence of the resin cement used was detected (p<0.001). Composite surface treatment did not affect mean bond strengths (p>0.05), although interactions between resin cement and surface treatment were statistically significant (p<0.001).
Resin cement | Surface treatment | µTBS MPa (SD) | Pre-test failures (%) |
RelyX ARC | NOT | 24.8 (7.2) n=14 ab | 0 |
S | 17.4 (10.6) n=15 abcd | 20 | |
| SA | 27.1 (9.6) n=15 a | 0 |
Maxcem Elite | NOT | 4.5 (8.0) n=48 f | 60.8 |
S | 2.7 (6.4) n=53 f | 74.1 | |
| SA | 0.0 (0.0) n=29 g | 90.6 |
RelyX Unicem | NOT | 15.3 (6.2) n=11 cde | 0 |
S | 10.4 (9.1) n=17 e | 22.2 | |
| SA | 10.6 (9.5) n=19 de | 21.1 |
G-Cem | NOT | 5.0 (6.5) n=23 f | 43.3 |
| S | 14.6 (6.8) n=11 cde | 0 |
| SA | 18.4 (9.2) n=15 bc | 6.7 |