Characterization of an Experimental Two-Step Self-Etch Adhesive’s Bonding Performance and Resin-Dentin Interfacial Properties

Polymers

Pedro Álvarez Lloret¹  Pipop Saikaew²  AbuFaem Mohammad Almas Chowdhury³  Monica Yamauti³  Hidehiko Sano³  Arefin Alam³  RicardoMarins Carvalho⁴ 

[1] Department of Geology, Faculty of Geology, University of Oviedo, Jesús Arias de Velasco s/n, 33005 Oviedo, Spain;Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, No. 6 Yothi Road, Ratchathewi District, Bangkok 10400, Thailand;Department of Restorative Dentistry, Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Hokkaido University, Kita 13, Nishi 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-8586, Japan;Division of Biomaterials, Department of Oral Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, University of British Columbia, 2199 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada;

关键词: dentin bonding;    two-step self-etch adhesive;    universal adhesive;    microtensile bond strength;    resin-dentin interface;    scanning electron microscopy;   

DOI  :  10.3390/polym13071009

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

This study evaluated an experimental two-step self-etch adhesive (BZF-29, BZF) by comparing it with a reference two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil Megabond 2, MB) and a universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond, GP) for microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and resin-dentin interfacial characteristics. Twenty-four human third molars were used for the μTBS test. Bonded peripheral dentin slices were separated to observe the resin-dentin interface and measure the adhesive layer thickness with SEM. μTBS data of the central beams were obtained after 24 h and 6 months of water storage. Fracture modes were determined using a stereomicroscope and SEM. Nine additional third molars were used to determine the elastic modulus (E) employing an ultra microhardness tester. Water storage did not affect μTBS of the tested adhesives (p > 0.05). μTBS of BZF and MB were similar but significantly higher than GP (p < 0.05). BZF achieved the highest adhesive layer thickness, while GP the lowest. E of BZF and MB were comparable but significantly lower than GP (p < 0.05). Except for GP, the predominant fracture mode was nonadhesive. The superior bonding performance of BZF and MB could be attributed to their better mechanical property and increased adhesive thickness imparting better stress relief at the interface.

【 授权许可】

Unknown