Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry
OHPD Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTube
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: OHPD

 

Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry

Edited by Prof. Dr. Jean-François Roulet, Prof. Dr. Dr. Niklaus P. Lang, Prof. Dr. Palle Holmstrup

Official journal of the Academy of Minimally Invasive Dentistry, the World Congress of Microdentistry, and the European Society of Preventive Dentistry

ISSN (print) 1602-1622 • ISSN (online) 1757-9996

Publication:

Summer 2005
Volume 3 , Issue 2



Pages: 87-95
Back
Share Abstract:

Minimally Invasive Dentistry: Bond Strength of Different Sealant and Filling Materials to Enamel

Alonso, Roberta C. B. / Correr, Gisele M. / Borges, Ana F. S. / Kantovitz, Kamila R. / Rontani, Regina M. P.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of different sealant and filling materials, used in minimally invasive dentistry, to human enamel. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five sound extracted third molars were selected. The crowns were longitudinally sectioned, embedded in polystyrene resin, and grounded until a flat enamel surface was reached. The samples were assigned into seven groups (n = 10), according to the materials: G1-Fluoroshield; G2-Clinpro; G3-Dyract AP; G4-F2000; G5-Vitremer; G6-Fuji IX; G7-Vidrion F. All materials were applied according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The samples were stored in distilled water at 37C for 24 h and submitted to a shear bonding strength test in a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The failure sites were observed in Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). The data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (p < 0.05). Results: The mean values (MPa) of shear bond strength were for Fluroshield (25.92 8.83), Vitremer (20.41 13.34), Dyract AP (17.08 6.38), Clinpro (12.82 8.38), F2000 (8.71 3.74), Fuji IX (7.64 2.57), and Vidrion F (4.54 2.11). Fluroshield resin sealant and Vitremer resin modified glass- ionomer showed statistically higher shear bond strength values than the conventional glass ionomer (GIC) cements. Clinpro and F2000 showed bond strength values with statistical difference only from Fluroshield. The failure mode varied among the groups. The majority of samples presented mixed failure. Conclusion: FluroShield and Vitremer showed better performance of shear bond strength to enamel than conventional GIC.

Keywords: shear bond strength, sealants, filling materials, resin modified glass-ionomer

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog