Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi / 2003 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 1

Adhesion to dry and moist dentin: Evaluation of two different adhesives

İki farklı dentin adhesivinin kuru ve nemli dentine bağlantılarının incelenmesi

Pages
41–50
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results of shear bond strength tests and SEM measurements showed good aggrements.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, dentin adhesion of dentin adhesive systems that are applied with one and more than one steps to dry and moist dentin were evaluated utilising shear bond strength tests and scanning electron microscope (SEM) studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The results of the shear bond strength tests and SEM measurements demonstrated differences between the test groups of dry and moist dentin surfaces treated with SBMP and SB, and these results were statistically different.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results of shear bond strength tests and SEM measurements showed good aggrements.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, dentin adhesion of dentin adhesive systems that are applied with one and more than one steps to dry and moist dentin were evaluated utilising shear bond strength tests and scanning electron microscope (SEM) studies. In this study, Scothbond Multi Purpose (SBMP) and Single Bond (SB) adhesive systems were applied on the dentin surface of third molar teeth without caries, and above this, hybrid type restorative composite resin (Valux Plus) was applied. The results of the shear bond strength tests and SEM measurements demonstrated differences between the test groups of dry and moist dentin surfaces treated with SBMP and SB, and these results were statistically different. The samples of moist dentin surfaces treated with SBMP demonstrated greater bond strengths than the samples of moist dentin surfaces treated with SB. Similar results were obtained for the samples of dry dentin surfaces treated with SBMP and SB. In addition, the samples of moist dentin surfaces treated with SB demonstrated greater bond strengths as compared to the samples of dry dentin surfaces treated with SBMP. When the hybrid layers formed by dentin adhesives were evaluated with SEM, it was observed that, the hybrid layers of SBMP and SB applied moist surfaces had thicker than SBMP and SB applied dry surf aces. Moreover SBMP applied dry dentin surfaces had thicker hybrid layer than the SB applied moist surfaces. Results of shear bond strength tests and SEM measurements showed good aggrements.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, bir ve birden fazla aşamada uygulanan dentin adeziv sistemlerinin kuru ve nemli dentine bağlantıları, makaslama bağ dayancı testi ve yüzey tarama elektron mikroskobu SEM yardımıyla incelenmiştir. Çalışmamızda çürüksüz yirmi yaş dişlerinin dentin yüzeyine, Scothbond Multi Purpose Adeziv Sistemi (SBMP) ile Single Bond Adeziv Sistemi (SB) ve bunların üzerine de hibrit tip restoratif kompozit rezin (Valux Plus) uygulandı. Makaslama bağ dayancı testi ile SEM ölçümleri sonucunda, nemli ve kuru dentin yüzeylerine SBMP ve SB uygulanan test grupları arasındaki farklar, istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmuştur. Nemli dentin yüzeylerine SBMP uygulanan örnekler, nemli dentin yüzeyine SB uygulananlardan daha fazla bağ dayancı göstermiştir. Benzer sonuçlar kuru dentin yüzeyine uygulanan SBMP ve SB için de geçerlidir. Bununla birlikte, nemli dentin yüzeyine SB uygulanan örneklerin bağ dayancı değerleri, kuru yüzeye SBMP uygulananlardan daha fazladır. Dentin adezivlerinin meydana getirdikleri hibrid tabakaları SEM'de incelendiğinde, nemli yüzeye SBMP ve SB uygulanan örneklerde oluşan hibrid tabakalarının, kuru yüzeye uygulananlardaki hibrid tabakalarına göre daha fazla kalınlığa sahip oldukları gözlenmiştir. Bunun yanısıra, kuru dentin yüzeyine SBMP uygulanan örneklerde oluşan hibrid tabakalarının kalınlıkları, nemli yüzeye SB uygulananlardan daha azdır. Makaslama bağ dayancı testi ile SEM ölçümlerinde elde edilen bulgular, birbirini desteklemektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YALUĞ, S. (2022). Adhesion to dry and moist dentin: Evaluation of two different adhesives. Ankara Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 1, 41–50. https://ajindex.com/articles/442242

References (17)

  1. Tam LE, PILLIAR RM. Fracture toughness of dentin/resin-composite adhesive interfaces. J Dent Res 1993;72: 953-9
  2. Youngson CC, Grey NJA. An in vitro comparative analysis: scanning electron microscopy of dentin /restoration interfaces. Dent Mater 1992; 8: 252-8
  3. Zaimoğlu A, Can G, Ersoy A, Aksu L. Diş hekimliğinde maddeler bilgisi. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 1993;256-7 4. Dale BG, Aschheim KW. Esthetic dentistry. Philadelphia:Lea and Febiger, 1993; 15-23 5. El-Sherif M, Jacobi R. The ceramic reverse three quarter crown for anterior teeth: preparation design. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 61: 4-6
  4. Garber AD, Goldstein RE, Feinman RA. Porcelain laminate veneers. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co, 1988; 41-2 7. Pashley DH. The effect of acid etching on the pulpodentin complex. Oper Dent 1992; 17: 229-42
  5. Swift EJ, Perdiago J, Heymann H. Bonding to enamel and dentin: a brief history and state of the art 1995. Quintessence Int 1995; 26: 95-110
  6. Ulusoy N, Özyurt P. Dentin bonding ajanların dentine penetrasyonu: SEM çalışması. A Ü Diş HekFakDerg 1999;26:1-8
  7. Pashley DH, Ciucchi B, Sano H, Horner JA. Permeability of dentin to adhesive agents. Quintessence Int 1993; 24: 618-31
  8. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent 1997;25: 355-72
  9. Phillips RW. Skinner's science of dental materials, 9. Ed. Phil.: W. B. Saunders Co, 1991;238-41
  10. Eick JD, Robinson SJ, Byerley TJ, Chappelow CC-.Adhesive and nonshrinking dental resins of the future. Quintessence Int 1993; 24: 632-40
  11. Meiers JC, Kreşin JC. Cavity disinfectants and dentin bonding. Oper Dent 1996; 21: 153-9
  12. Ferrari M, Davidson CL. In vivo resin-dentin Interdiffusion and tag formation with lateral branches of two adhesive systems. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 76: 250-3
  13. VanMeerbeeck B, Lambrechts P, Inokoshi S, Braem M, Vanherle G. Factors affecting adhesion to mineralized tissues: Oper Dent 1992; 5: 111-24
  14. Ayad MF, Rosenstiel SF, Farag AM. A Pilot study of lactic acid as an enamel and dentin conditioner for dentin-bonding agent development. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:254-9
  15. Barkmeier WW, Cooley RL. Laboratory evalu ation of adhesive systems. Oper Dent 1992; 5: 50-61
  16. Chappell RP, Eick JD. Shear bond strength and scanning electron microscopic observation of six current dentinal adhesives.Quintessence Int 1994; 25: 359-68
  17. Eick JD, Robinson SJ, Chappell RP, Cobb CM, Spencer P. The dentinal surface: Its influence on dentinal adh