Effect on Adhesion to Tooth Structure for some Experimental Dental Adhesive System

Abstract:

The present study was conducted with the aim of evaluating and comparing the microleakage at the dentin and enamel/composite interfaces of two adhesive systems. The adhesives are: a new-developed experimental adhesive systems and OptiBond FL (Kerr Corp.) The new adhesive system was prepared for the composite material as three steps adhesive (etchant, primer and bonding). The bonding resin contains the base monomer that was present in the corresponding composite material, HEMA and TEGDMA as diluents. Twenty box-type Class V standardized cavities were prepared on the facial and oral surfaces of each tooth, with coronal margins in enamel and apical margins in cementum (dentin). The preparations were restored with two restorative materials a new experimental microfilled resin composites based on Bis-GMA analogue and hybrid resin composite Herculite XRV Ultra (Kerr Corp.). The teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 2% methyl blue solution for 24 hours. The specimens were sectioned buccolingually into 3 slices and the resulted sections were examined using a stereomicroscope under 40x magnification. The extent of dye penetration was measured in a quantitative manner. This measurement was converted into percentage using the formula described by Sano et al. I=p/Lx100. These percentage values were submitted to variance analyses (ANOVA) and t test at a p<0.05 level of significance. Scanning electron microscopy was used in order to see the interface between tooth and composite restoration. Significantly less microleakage was associated with the use of OptiBond FL adhesive system at the enamel surface. Between the enamel and the dentin margins no significantly statistical differences were found just for the experimental adhesive system. This adhesive containing water and ethanol as solvent performed significantly better at the dentin margins.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 614)
• Pages: 100-104
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.614.100
• Online since: June 2014
• Authors: Loredana Colceriu*, Sanda Cimpean, Codruta Nicola, Sorina Sava, Marcela Trif, Tinca Buruiana, Marioara Moldovan, Laura Silaghi-Dumitrescu, Aurora Antoniac, Ana-Iulia Blajan, Cristina Prejmerean
• Keywords: Adhesive Systems, Dentin, Enamel, Microleakage, Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Stereomicroscopy

References

[1] Rosin M. Urban AD, Gartner C, et al. Polymerization shrinkage-strain and microleakage in dentin-bordered cavities of chemically and light-cured restorative materials. Dent. Mater. 2002; 18(7): 521-8.

DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(01)00078-1

[2] Alani AH, Toh GC. Detection of microleakage around dental restoration: a review. Oper. Dent. 1997; 22: 173-185.

[3] Prati C, Nucci C, Toledano M, Garcia-Godoy F, Breschi L, Chersoni S. Microleakage and marginal hybrid layer formation of compomer restorations. Oper. Dent. 2004; 29(1): 35- 41.

[4] Prati C, Pashley DH, Chersoni S, Mongiorgi R. Marginal hybrid layer in Class V restoration. Oper. Dent. 2000; 25(3): 228-33.

[5] Eliades G. Clinical relevance of formulation and testing of dentin bonding system. J Dent 1994; 22(2): 73-81.

[6] Fusayma T Kojima M Kurosaky N Iwaku M Non-pressure adhesion of a new adhesive restorative resin. J Dent Res 1979; 58: 1364-1370.

DOI: 10.1177/00220345790580041101

[7] Inoue S, Vargas MA, Van Meerbeek B, Abe Y, YoshidaY, Lambrechts P, et al . Micro-tensile bond strength of eleven modern adhesives to dentin 2001b; 3: 445-455.

[8] Van Dijken JW Clinical evaluation of three adhesives systems in class V non-carious lesions. Dent Mater 2000; 16: 285-291.

DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00019-1

[9] De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Van Meerbeek B. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 2005; 84(2): 118-132.

DOI: 10.1177/154405910508400204

[10] Tay FR, Pashley DH, Yoshiyama M. Have dentin adhesives becom too hydrophilic? J Can Dent Assoc 2003; 69: 726-731.

[11] Engelmann J, Leyhausen G, Leibfritz D, Geurtsen W. Effect of TEGDMA on the intracellular glutathione concentration of human gingival fibroblast. J Biomed Mater Res, 2002; 63: 746-751.

DOI: 10.1002/jbm.10465

[12] Tay FR, Pashley DH, Kapur RR, Carrilho MRO, Hur YB, Garrett LV, Tay KCY. Bonding BisGMA to dentin-a proof of concept for hydrophobic dentin bonding. J Dent Res 2007; 86(11): 1034-1039.

DOI: 10.1177/154405910708601103

[13] Arias VG, Campos IT, Pimenta LAF. Microleakage study of three adhesive systems. Braz Dent J 2004; 15(3) : 194-198.

DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402004000300006

[14] Sano H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Hornen J A Matthews WG, Pashley DH. Nanoleakage: leakage within the hybrid layer. Oper Dent 1995 20: 18-25.

[15] Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Braem M, Lambrechts P. Vanherle G. Morphological aspects of the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone with different dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1992; 71: 1530-1540.

DOI: 10.1177/00220345920710081301

[16] Ferracane JL, Mitchem JC, Relationship between composite stress and leakage in class V cavities. Am. J Dent 2003; 16: 239-43.