Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Aug;19(4):363-9.
doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572011005000011. Epub 2011 Jun 24.

Tensile bond strength of indirect composites luted with three new self-adhesive resin cements to dentin

Affiliations

Tensile bond strength of indirect composites luted with three new self-adhesive resin cements to dentin

Cafer Türkmen et al. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: The aims of this study were to evaluate the tensile bond strengths between indirect composites and dentin of 3 recently developed self-adhesive resin cements and to determine mode of failure by SEM.

Material and methods: Exposed dentin surfaces of 70 mandibular third molars were used. Teeth were randomly divided into 7 groups: Group 1 (control group): direct composite resin restoration (Alert) with etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Bond 1 primer/adhesive), Group 2: indirect composite restoration (Estenia) luted with a resin cement (Cement-It) combined with the same etch-and-rinse adhesive, Group 3: direct composite resin restoration with self-etch adhesive system (Nano-Bond), Group 4: indirect composite restoration luted with the resin cement combined with the same self-etch adhesive, Groups 5-7: indirect composite restoration luted with self-adhesive resin cements (RelyX Unicem, Maxcem, and Embrace WetBond, respectively) onto the non-pretreated dentin surfaces. Tensile bond strengths of groups were tested with a universal testing machine at a constant speed of 1 mm/min using a 50 kgf load cell. Results were statistically analyzed by the Student's t-test. The failure modes of all groups were also evaluated.

Results: The indirect composite restorations luted with the self-adhesive resin cements (groups 5-7) showed better results compared to the other groups (p<0.05). Group 4 showed the weakest bond strength (p>0.05). The surfaces of all debonded specimens showed evidence of both adhesive and cohesive failure.

Conclusion: The new universal self-adhesive resins may be considered an alternative for luting indirect composite restorations onto non-pretreated dentin surfaces.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abo-Hamar SE, Hiller KA, Jung H, Federlin M, Friedl KH, Schmalz G. Bond strength of a new universal self-adhesive resin luting cement to dentin and enamel. Clin Oral Invest. 2005;9:161–167. - PubMed
    1. Amaral FLB, Colucci V, Palma-Dibb RG, Corona SAM. Assessment of in vitro methods used to promote adhesive interface degradation: a critical review. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2007;19:340–354. - PubMed
    1. Amaral FLB, Colucci V, Souza-Gabriel AE, Chinelatti MA, Palma Dibb RG, Corona SAM. Adhesion to Er: YAG laser-prepared dentin after long-term water storage and thermocycling. Oper Dent. 2008;33:51–58. - PubMed
    1. Ateyah NZ, Elhejazi AA. Shear bond strengths and microleakage of four types of dentin adhesive materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2004;5:63–73. - PubMed
    1. Brackett WW, Haisch LD, Pearce MG, Brackett MG. Microleakage of Class V resin composite restorations placed with self-etching adhesives. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;91:42–45. - PubMed