Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Two Dentin Bonding Agents with Two Desensitizers (An In-Vitro Study)
Shear Bond Strength of Two Dentin Bonding Agents Screening
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70284/njirm.v7i4.1117Keywords:
2-hydroxyl ethyl methacrylate, glutaraldehyde, rewetting agents, shear bond strengthAbstract
Background: The esthetic quality of a restoration may be as important to the mental health of the patient as the biological and technical qualities of the restoration are to his physical or dental health. In Conservative Dentistry; to mimic, repair and reconstruct the natural tooth structure for the long term, would be based on the use of a restorative material retained only by an adhesive system, whether in load bearing or non-load bearing environments. To achieve high strength, bonds between tooth structure and restorative materials have been a long term goal of dental profession. Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the shear bond strength of two different dentin bonding agents with two different desensitizers. Materials and Methods: Eighty molars were taken, which were ground to expose dentin. The teeth were divided into two major groups. Each major group was subdivided into four subgroups of 10 samples each. Groups Ia and IIa were treated as dry bonding groups, groups Ib and IIb were treated as moist bonding groups, group Ic and IIc were rewetted with Gluma desensitizer, and groups Id and IId were rewetted with Systemp® desensitizer. Major group I was treated with Gluma comfort bond and Charisma. Major group II was treated with 3M ESPE Adper™ Single Bond 2 and 3M ESPE Filtek™ Z250. The samples were thermocycled and shear bond test was performed using Instron machine. The data was analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s significant different test. Results: The results revealed that the specimens rewetted with Gluma desensitizer showed the higher shear bond strength compared to all other groups, irrespective of the bonding agent or composite resin used. Conclusion: It can be concluded that the moist or rewetting technique could preserve the micro-morphological integrity of the collagen resulting in the optimum penetration of adhesive resin into the demineralized layer, thus, giving higher bond strength. [Dr.Vibha D NJIRM 2016; 7(4): 117-124]
References
2. Nakabayashi N, Pashley DH. Hybridization of dental Tissues. Che.3, 1, 2.Tokyo: Quintessence publishing co Ltd; 1998.
3. Kanca J 3rd. Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 1992;23:39-41.
4. Pilo R, Cardash HS, Oz-Ari B, Ben-Amar A. Effect of preliminary treatment of the dentin surface on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin. Oper Dent 2001;26:569-75.
5. Marshall G.W. Jr,Marshall S.J., Kinney J.H., BaloochM.The dentin substrate : structure and properties related to bonding. Journal of Dentistry, 1997;25:441-458.
6. Al Qahtani MQ, Platt JA, Moore BK, Cochran MA. The effect on shear bond strength of rewetting dry dentin with two desensitizers. Oper Dent 2003;28:287-96.
7. Pilo R, Cardash HS, Oz-Ari B, Ben-Amar A. Effect of preliminary treatment of the dentin surface on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin. Oper Dent 2001;26:569-75.
8. Perdigão J, Van Meerbeek B, Lopes MM, Ambrose WW. The effect of a re-wetting agent on dentin bonding. Dent Mater 1999;15:282-95.
9. Perdigão J, Swift EJ Jr, Heymann HO, Malek MA. Effect of a re-wetting agent on the performance of acetone-based dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 1998;11:207-13.
10. Ivan S, Thomas H, Ellis ES. Adhesion to tooth structure mediated by contemporary bonding system. Dent Clin N Am 2007;51:677-694.
11. Triolo PT, Swift EJ, Barkmeir WW. Shear Bond strengths of composite to dentin using six dental adhesives systems. Oper Dent 1995; 20:46-50.
12. Haller B. Recent developments in dentin bonding. Am J Dent 2000; 13:44-50.
13. Gallo JR 3rd, Henderson M, Burgess JO. Shear bond strength to moist and dry dentin of four dentin bonding systems. Am J Dent 2000; 13:267-270.
14. Kulton CG, Qian XJ, Suh BI. Moist Bonding vs Dry Bonding for three Dental Bonding system. J Dent Res 1996; IADR Abstracts 75.Special issue; 2999,392
15. Tay FR, Gwinnett AJ, Pang KM, Wei SH. Variability in Micro leakage observed in a total etches wet-bonding technique under Different Handling Conditions. J Dent Res 1995; 74:1168-78.
16. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Duke ES, Eick JD, et al. A TEM study of two water based adhesive systems bonded to Dry and Wet Dentin. J Dent Res 1998
17. Lopes GC. Shear bond strength of acetone based one bottle adhesive system. Braz Dent J 2006; 17(1):39-43.
18. Lehmann N, Degrange M. Effect of four desensitizers on the shear bond strength of three bonding systems. European Cells and Materials 2005; 9.Suppl (1):52-3.
19. Soares CJ, Santos Filho PC, Barreto BC, Mota AS. Effect of previous desensitizer and rewetting agent application on shear bond strength of bonding systems to dentin. Cienc odontol bras 2006; 9(4):6-11.
20. Ritter AV, Bertoli C, Swift EF Jr. Shear Bond Strengths of Gluma Bonding Systems to Dentin. J Dent Res 2000; 79:1852.
21. Ritter AV, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr, Perdigão J, Rosa BT. Effects of different re-wetting techniques on dentin shear bond strengths. J Esthet Restor Dent 2000; 12:85-96.
22. Bansal A, Shivanna V. Effect of Rewetting agents on the shear bond strength of different bonding agents when applied on dry dentin. J Conserv Dent 2007; 10:26-32.
23. Dijkman GE, Jongebloed WL, de Vries J, Ogaard B, Arends J. Closing of dentinal tubules by glutaraldehyde treatment, a scanning electron microscopy study. Scand J Dent Res 1994; 102:144-50.
24. Bhatia S, Krishnaswami MM. Effect of two different dentin desensitizers on shear bond strength of two different bonding agents to dentin: an in vitro study. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 2012; 23:703-708.
25. Jorge Perdigao. Dentin bonding as a function of dentin structure. Dent Clin N Am(2002) 277-301
