Comparative Evaluation of the Bonding Efficacy of Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Generation Bonding Agents: An in Vitro Study

Paul, Joseph; Chakravarthy, Yadav; Kumar, Satheesh; Rahna, Raju

doi:10.7897/2230-8407.04930

Cited by 19 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 8th-generation bonding group has nano-sized cross-linking agents that increase its bonding potential to hydroxyapatite. It also has silica particles, as well as the benefits of being dual-cure (17). On the other hand, the presence of BTH (butylated hydroxyl toluene) in G-Premio can be a factor for its high bandwidth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Composite Restoration by Different Dentin Bonding Systems Under Different Cycling Conditions

Asgartooran¹,

Shokripour²,

Ghasemi³

et al. 2020

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Adhesion of composite resins to dentin is crucial in restorative dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate shear bond strength of composite restorations to dentin under different cycling conditions. Methods: Ninety extracted premolar teeth were randomly divided into 9 groups (n=10). The samples were mounted in resin and sectioned to prepare dentin samples. Then the samples were polished with 600-grit silicon carbide sanding sheet, and adhesive types of bonding (5 th generation/Ambar, 6 th generation/Clearfil SE bond, 8 th generation/G-Premio) were applied on them. Afterward, composite resin was bonded to the surface, and cycling was exerted (control: no cycling; thermal cycling: 3000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C; thermal/erosive cycling: thermal cycling and storage in hydrochloric acid, pH = 2.1, 5 minutes, 6 times a day, for 8 days). Shear bond test was done for the specimens. Finally, statistical analysis was done using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test (P < 0.001). Results: G-Premio displayed the most bond strength. No significant differences were observed between Clearfil liner bond and Ambar bond. While significant differences were observed in different cycling conditions. Measured bond strength was reduced by thermal/erosive cycling. Conclusions: Thermal cycling and thermal/erosive cycling could affect the shear bond strength of composite to dentin. Universal bonding systems can also increase the shear bond strength of composite resin to dentin.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Composite Restoration by Different Dentin Bonding Systems Under Different Cycling Conditions

Asgartooran¹,

Shokripour²,

Ghasemi³

et al. 2020

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other variables like functional monomers, cross-linking monomers, solvents, inhibitors and activators can have various bonding that can influence the bond strength. Furthermore, the substrate (composite, dentin, enamel, etc), type of the performed test for bond strength, storage duration and aging conditions of the substrate affect the results, as well (31).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10-MDP in universal bonding makes chemical bond with with hydroxyapatite crystals. Moreover, similar functional chemical monomers bond oxides by hydrophilic phosphate terminals and copolymerized with resin monomers through the hydrophobic methacrylate terminal (31,36).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison the Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Composite

Shokripor¹,

Soufi²,

Ahmadi³

et al. 2019

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWith the increased demand for aesthetic procedures as well as the development of bonding systems, the applied composites are routinely and widely used for direct restorations (1-3).In recent years, in spite of the considerable advances in resin composite components, marginal failures have occurred due to abrasion, discoloration, secondary decay, polymerization contraction, microleakage, poor anatomical form, pain and tenderness, which limit the composites' lifetime (3-8). In these cases, selected treatments include repair or replacement of the entire restoration. The repair is a conservative process, so that there is no need for removing entire restoration and the minimum cavity preparation is only required (9). Repairing old composite restorations is considered as a challenge due to the reduction of its free radicals after the

show abstract

“…19 Previous studies by Joseph in 2013 and Kable et al in 2015 reported that generation VIII showed the highest tensile strength. The study compared the VI, VII, and VIII bonding materials on the teeth without bleaching application, 20,21 whereas this study compared the V and VIII generation post extracoronal bleaching.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in the tensile strength of direct nanohybrid composite veneers between the V and VIII generation dentin bonding agent after extracoronal bleaching

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Tooth discolouration is the most common esthetic problems in dentistry. Direct composite veneer is an adjunctive therapy for severe teeth discolouration by attaching to the tooth surface using an acid etching and dental bonding agent. In several cases of severe discolouration, it is required to have certain preliminary treatments such as bleaching prior to the placement of the composite veneer. However, bleaching agents are able to lead the enamels morphology and microstructure alteration by inhibiting the polymerisation bonding thus affecting the veneer adhesion. This study was aimed to determine the tensile bond strength of direct composite veneers between the V and VII generation dentin bonding agent after extracoronal bleaching. Methods: This study was an experimental laboratory of as much as 32 human permanent maxillary central incisors were divided into 4 groups. Group 1 was treated with extracoronal bleaching and bonded with the V generation bonding nanohybrid composite. Group 2 was treated with extracoronal bleaching and bonded with the VIII generation bonding nanohybrid composite. Group 3 was only bonded with the V generation bonding nanohybrid composite. Group 4 was only bonded with the VIII generation bonding nanohybrid composite. All samples were immersed in artificial saliva then incubated at the room temperature for 24 hours. Results: The tensile strength value was determined using the Universal Testing Machine. The ANOVA test results showed significant differences in all four groups (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The VIII generation bonding agent had a higher tensile strength than the V generation.

show abstract

Comparative Evaluation of the Bonding Efficacy of Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Generation Bonding Agents: An in Vitro Study

Cited by 19 publications

References 13 publications

Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Composite Restoration by Different Dentin Bonding Systems Under Different Cycling Conditions

Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Composite Restoration by Different Dentin Bonding Systems Under Different Cycling Conditions

Comparison the Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Composite

Differences in the tensile strength of direct nanohybrid composite veneers between the V and VIII generation dentin bonding agent after extracoronal bleaching

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About