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
Comparative Study
. 2013 Oct;41(10):861-71.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.07.002. Epub 2013 Jul 11.

Combined effect of smear layer characteristics and hydrostatic pulpal pressure on dentine bond strength of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing adhesives

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Combined effect of smear layer characteristics and hydrostatic pulpal pressure on dentine bond strength of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing adhesives

Mohd Haidil Akmal Mahdan et al. J Dent. 2013 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluated the combined effect of smear layer characteristics with hydrostatic pulpal pressure (PP) on bond strength and nanoleakage expression of HEMA-free and -containing self-etch adhesives.

Methods: Flat dentine surfaces were obtained from extracted human molars. Smear layers were created by grinding with #180- or #600-SiC paper. Three HEMA-free adhesives (Xeno V, G Bond Plus, Beautibond Multi) and two HEMA-containing adhesives (Bond Force, Tri-S Bond) were applied to the dentine surfaces under hydrostatic PP or none. Dentine bond strengths were determined using the microtensile bond test (μTBS). Data were statistically analyzed using three- and two-way ANOVA with Tukey post hoc comparison test. Nanoleakage evaluation was carried out under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).

Results: Coarse smear layer preparation and hydrostatic PP negatively affected the μTBS of HEMA-free and -containing adhesives, but there were no significant differences. The combined experimental condition significantly reduced μTBS of the HEMA-free adhesives, while the HEMA-containing adhesives exhibited no significant differences. Two-way ANOVA indicated that for HEMA-free adhesives, there were significant interactions in μTBS between smear layer characteristics and pulpal pressure, while for HEMA-containing adhesives, there were no significant interactions between them. Nanoleakage formation within the adhesive layers of both adhesive systems distinctly increased in the combined experimental group.

Conclusion: The combined effect of coarse smear layer preparation with hydrostatic PP significantly reduced the μTBS of HEMA-free adhesives, while in HEMA-containing adhesives, these effects were not obvious.

Clinical significance: Smear layer characteristics and hydrostatic PP would additively compromise dentine bonding of self-etch adhesives, especially HEMA-free adhesives.

Keywords: Dentine bond strength; HEMA; Hydrostatic pulpal pressure; One-step self-etch adhesives; Smear layer characteristics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources