File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems

TitleMicrotensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems
Authors
KeywordsChemicals And Cas Registry Numbers
Issue Date2000
PublisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/dental
Citation
Dental Materials, 2000, v. 16 n. 3, p. 180-187 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems (Solid Bond, EBS-Multi, PermaQuik, One Coat Bond, Gluma One Bond, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V) and their respective fracture modes. Methods. Superficial occlusal dentin of extracted human molars was exposed, finished with wet 600-grit silicon carbide paper, and a block of resin composite bonded with the above adhesives according to the manufacturers' instructions. The teeth were kept in tap water for 24 h at 37°C, sectioned to obtain three or four bar-shaped specimens, which were then shaped to an hour-glass form of 1.2 ± 0.02 mm diameter. The specimens were stressed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until rupture of the bond. The mean bond strengths were compared using one-way ANOVA and LSD tests. The frequency of fracture modes was compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Results. Mean microtensile bond strengths ranged from (17.8 ± 7.0) MPa for Solid Bond to (36.0 ± 8.1) MPa for Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. The bond strength of Clearfil Liner Bond 2V and PermaQuik (30.8 ± 8.5 MPa) were not significantly different, and were higher than all other materials. Bond strengths of Solid Bond (17.8 ± 7.0) MPa, EBS-Multi (18.7 ± 5.0) MPa, One Coat Bond (21.9 ± 5.6) MPa, and Gluma One Bond (23.4 ± 5.2) MPa were not significantly different. SEM examination indicated that Solid Bond, EBS-Multi and One Coat Bond showed no significant difference in failure modes but were significantly different from PermaQuik, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. Significance. The self-etching primer system, Clearfil Liner Bond 2V, provided the simplest bonding technique, and together with PermaQuik exhibited greatest bond strength to dentin. © 2000 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/90683
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.931
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.339
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTanumiharja, Men_HK
dc.contributor.authorBurrow, MFen_HK
dc.contributor.authorTyas, MJen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-17T10:06:44Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-17T10:06:44Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_HK
dc.identifier.citationDental Materials, 2000, v. 16 n. 3, p. 180-187en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0109-5641en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/90683-
dc.description.abstractObjectives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems (Solid Bond, EBS-Multi, PermaQuik, One Coat Bond, Gluma One Bond, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V) and their respective fracture modes. Methods. Superficial occlusal dentin of extracted human molars was exposed, finished with wet 600-grit silicon carbide paper, and a block of resin composite bonded with the above adhesives according to the manufacturers' instructions. The teeth were kept in tap water for 24 h at 37°C, sectioned to obtain three or four bar-shaped specimens, which were then shaped to an hour-glass form of 1.2 ± 0.02 mm diameter. The specimens were stressed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until rupture of the bond. The mean bond strengths were compared using one-way ANOVA and LSD tests. The frequency of fracture modes was compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests. Results. Mean microtensile bond strengths ranged from (17.8 ± 7.0) MPa for Solid Bond to (36.0 ± 8.1) MPa for Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. The bond strength of Clearfil Liner Bond 2V and PermaQuik (30.8 ± 8.5 MPa) were not significantly different, and were higher than all other materials. Bond strengths of Solid Bond (17.8 ± 7.0) MPa, EBS-Multi (18.7 ± 5.0) MPa, One Coat Bond (21.9 ± 5.6) MPa, and Gluma One Bond (23.4 ± 5.2) MPa were not significantly different. SEM examination indicated that Solid Bond, EBS-Multi and One Coat Bond showed no significant difference in failure modes but were significantly different from PermaQuik, Prime & Bond NT/NRC and Clearfil Liner Bond 2V. Significance. The self-etching primer system, Clearfil Liner Bond 2V, provided the simplest bonding technique, and together with PermaQuik exhibited greatest bond strength to dentin. © 2000 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/dentalen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofDental Materialsen_HK
dc.subjectChemicals And Cas Registry Numbersen_HK
dc.subject.meshAnalysis of Varianceen_HK
dc.subject.meshBisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshCarbon Compounds, Inorganicen_HK
dc.subject.meshComposite Resins - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshDental Bondingen_HK
dc.subject.meshDentin - ultrastructureen_HK
dc.subject.meshDentin-Bonding Agents - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshEpoxy Compounds - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshGlutaral - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshLeast-Squares Analysisen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaterials Testingen_HK
dc.subject.meshMethacrylates - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshPhosphoric Acids - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshPolymethacrylic Acids - chemistryen_HK
dc.subject.meshSilicon Compoundsen_HK
dc.subject.meshStatistics, Nonparametricen_HK
dc.subject.meshTemperatureen_HK
dc.subject.meshTensile Strengthen_HK
dc.subject.meshWater - chemistryen_HK
dc.titleMicrotensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systemsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailBurrow, MF:mfburr58@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityBurrow, MF=rp01306en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.pmid10762678-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0034188507en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0034188507&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume16en_HK
dc.identifier.issue3en_HK
dc.identifier.spage180en_HK
dc.identifier.epage187en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000086806700004-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTanumiharja, M=6602267792en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBurrow, MF=7005876730en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTyas, MJ=7006088443en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats