Home Subscription Services

Quintessence International
QI Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: QI
Quintessence International

Edited by Eli Eliav

ISSN 0033-6572 (print) • ISSN 1936-7163 (online)

October 2005
Volume 36 , Issue 9

Share Abstract:

Scanning electron microscopy examination of 3 different adhesive systems

Maria Aparecida Alves de Cerqueria Luz, DDS, MS, PhD/Victor E. Arana-Chavez, DDS, MS, PhD/Narciso Garone Netto, DDS, PhD

Pages: 687–694
PMID: 16163871

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the interaction of dentin with 2 different self-etch resin bonding systems, as well as with a total-etch resin bonding system. Method and materials: Nine recently extracted, unerupted third molars, roots, and occlusal thirds were used. A standardized smear layer was produced on the occlusal dentin surface exposed. The specimens were split into 3 groups of 3 specimens each, 1 group for each bonding agent: Clearfil Liner Bond 2, Prime & Bond 2.1, and Scotchbond Multipurpose (control group). After the tooth was briefly sprayed with an air/water mixture, 1 of the experimental adhesive systems was applied on the dentin surface. A 2-mm layer of composite was applied over the adhesive system layer. After 7 days in distilled water at 37°C, the specimens were cross-sectioned perpendicular to the resin-dentin interface. The cross-sections were mounted on aluminum stubs, etched with 2% hydrochloridric acid, and studied using scanning electron microscopy. A descriptive analysis of the images of the interdiffusion zone characteristics was done first. Afterwards, statistical analyses of the measurements of the interdiffusion zone structures—hybrid layer thickness, resin tags penetration, and adhesive layer thickness using analysis of variance, followed by “post hoc” test—were carried out to compare the bonding systems’ interactions. Results: The descriptive analysis of the self-etch bonding systems studied showed a good interlocking of Clearfil Liner Bond 2 with dentin, similar to Scotchbond Multipurpose and better than Prime & Bond 2.1. The analysis of variance, followed by the “post hoc” test, identified statistical differences just for the adhesive layer thickness that was thicker for Scotchbond than for Prime & Bond (P = .020). The “post hoc” test also showed a strong tendency to identify differences between the Scotchbond and the Prime & Bond groups (P = .062), and the Clearfil and the Prime & Bond groups (P = .069). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, Clearfil Liner Bond 2 produced the thickest hybrid layer with deepest tag formation and good interlocking with dentin, similar to the control. Statistical differences among the interdiffusion zone of the 3 bonding systems studied were identified just for the adhesive layer thickness, which was thicker for Scotchbond than for Prime & Bond. (Quintessence Int 2005;36:687–694)

Key words: adhesion on dentin, hybrid layer, interdiffusion zone, scanning electron microscopy, self-etch resin bonding systems

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2017 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