IADR Abstract Archives
Comparison of Composite-Dentin Interfaces Between Conventional and Self-Light-Cure Composites
Objectives: This study aimed to assess bonding performance and interfacial ultramorphology of a light-cured conventional composite and a newly marketed, self-curing composite, both tested with an etch-and-rinse (ER) or self-etch (SE) adhesive approach.
Methods: Twenty class I cavities were prepared in dentin and restored using two restorative materials: (i) CERAM (n=10; CERAM.X ONE, Dentsply Sirona) with a universal adhesive system (PBU: Prime & Bond Universal) and (ii) STELA (n=10; Stela Automix, SDI) in combination with its proprietary adhesive system, which do not require light-curing, as it polymerizes upon contact with the restorative material. Half of the specimens from each group were bonded in ER or SE mode. Specimens were submitted to a microtensile bond strength (µTBS) test. Failure mode was determined using a stereomicroscope, and fractographic analysis was performed through SEM. The interface ultramorphology of resin-dentin slabs were also analyzed using dye-assisted confocal microscopy.
Results: SE groups exhibited significantly lower bond strength (17.4MPa CERAM; 26.2MPa Stela) compared to ER groups (35.8MPa CERAM; 33.6MPa Stela)(p<.05). Furthermore, CERAM applied in SE mode was the only group presenting a pre-failure rate (27%). The failure mode was predominantly mixed in ER groups and adhesive in SE groups. Nanoleakage was observed in CERAM groups, applied in both ER and SE modes but was less evident in Stela groups.
Conclusions: SE adhesive mode resulted in lower bond strength using the tested composites. The new self-cure composite (STELA) could be a clinical option to challenge the presence of high amounts of nanoleakage at the interface of the conventional composite.
Methods: Twenty class I cavities were prepared in dentin and restored using two restorative materials: (i) CERAM (n=10; CERAM.X ONE, Dentsply Sirona) with a universal adhesive system (PBU: Prime & Bond Universal) and (ii) STELA (n=10; Stela Automix, SDI) in combination with its proprietary adhesive system, which do not require light-curing, as it polymerizes upon contact with the restorative material. Half of the specimens from each group were bonded in ER or SE mode. Specimens were submitted to a microtensile bond strength (µTBS) test. Failure mode was determined using a stereomicroscope, and fractographic analysis was performed through SEM. The interface ultramorphology of resin-dentin slabs were also analyzed using dye-assisted confocal microscopy.
Results: SE groups exhibited significantly lower bond strength (17.4MPa CERAM; 26.2MPa Stela) compared to ER groups (35.8MPa CERAM; 33.6MPa Stela)(p<.05). Furthermore, CERAM applied in SE mode was the only group presenting a pre-failure rate (27%). The failure mode was predominantly mixed in ER groups and adhesive in SE groups. Nanoleakage was observed in CERAM groups, applied in both ER and SE modes but was less evident in Stela groups.
Conclusions: SE adhesive mode resulted in lower bond strength using the tested composites. The new self-cure composite (STELA) could be a clinical option to challenge the presence of high amounts of nanoleakage at the interface of the conventional composite.