IADR Abstract Archives
Cytotoxicity and adhesive properties of etch-and-rinse universal adhesive systems on caries-affected dentin: 18 months
Objectives: To evaluate cytotoxicity (CTX), as well as resin-dentine microtensile bond strength (μTBS), nanoleakage (NL) and in situ degree of conversion (DC) on sound and caries-affected dentine of six universal adhesives (UAs) applied in etch-and-rinse mode.
Methods: The following universal adhesives were used: Prime&Bond Active (PBA); Scotchbond Universal (SBU); Tetric N-Bond Universal (TNU); Ambar Universal (AMU); Clearfil Universal Bond Quick (CUQ) and One Coat 7 Universal (OCU). For CTX, Saos-2 cell-line was used. After, the adhesives were applied in etch-and-rinse strategy to flat sound or carious dentine surfaces, composite resin restorations were build-ups. Then, the specimens were sectioned to obtain sticks to be evaluated in μTBS, NL and DC after 24h and μTBS and NL after 18 months of water storage (18M). ANOVA and Tukey’s test were applied (α = 0.05).
Results: For CTX, PBA, AMU, CUQ and OCU present cytotoxicity in different dilutions. For μTBS, OCU present the lowest values, regardless of time, dentine or strategy. For NL, PBA present the highest values, on sound dentine, regardless the time. TNU present the highest DC, while PBA and OCU present the lowest DC. Worst values of μTBS, NL and DC were always obtained in caries-affected dentine (p<0.05).
Conclusions: Not all UAs have the same performance in terms of cytotoxicity. However, the majority showed worst results in terms of bonding when applied in carious dentine, mainly after 18M.
Methods: The following universal adhesives were used: Prime&Bond Active (PBA); Scotchbond Universal (SBU); Tetric N-Bond Universal (TNU); Ambar Universal (AMU); Clearfil Universal Bond Quick (CUQ) and One Coat 7 Universal (OCU). For CTX, Saos-2 cell-line was used. After, the adhesives were applied in etch-and-rinse strategy to flat sound or carious dentine surfaces, composite resin restorations were build-ups. Then, the specimens were sectioned to obtain sticks to be evaluated in μTBS, NL and DC after 24h and μTBS and NL after 18 months of water storage (18M). ANOVA and Tukey’s test were applied (α = 0.05).
Results: For CTX, PBA, AMU, CUQ and OCU present cytotoxicity in different dilutions. For μTBS, OCU present the lowest values, regardless of time, dentine or strategy. For NL, PBA present the highest values, on sound dentine, regardless the time. TNU present the highest DC, while PBA and OCU present the lowest DC. Worst values of μTBS, NL and DC were always obtained in caries-affected dentine (p<0.05).
Conclusions: Not all UAs have the same performance in terms of cytotoxicity. However, the majority showed worst results in terms of bonding when applied in carious dentine, mainly after 18M.