Deproteinized dentin: A favorable substrate to self‐bonding resin cements?

Abstract

The adhesive performance on deproteinized dentin of different self-adhesive resin cements was evaluated through microtensile bond strength (μTBS) analysis and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Occlusal dentin of human molars were distributed into different groups, according to the categories: adhesive cementation with two-step bonding systems-control Groups (Adper Single Bond 2 + RelyX ARC/3M ESPE; One Step Plus + Duolink/Bisco; Excite + Variolink I/Ivoclar Vivadent) and self-adhesive cementation-experimental groups (Rely X Unicem/3M ESPE; Biscem/Bisco; MultiLink Sprint/Ivoclar Vivadent). Each group was subdivided according to the dentin approach to: α, maintenance of collagen fibers and β, deproteinization. The mean values were obtained, and submitted to ANOVA and Tukey test. Statistical differences were obtained to the RelyX Unicem groups (α = 13.59 MPa; β = 30.19 MPa). All the BIS Group specimens failed before the mechanical tests. Dentinal deproteinization provided an improved bond performance for the self-adhesive cement Rely X Unicem, and had no negative effect on the other cementing systems studied.

Indirect restoration in composite resin: a clinical report of self-adhesive cementation in deproteinized dentin

“…As a consequence, this may lead to compromising the durability of adhesion in the long term. 3 Taking this possibility into account, the deproteinization technique was used to make the hybrid layer more stable and reduce its degradation process. In this technique, the dissolution of the collagen fibers occurs, due to the non-specific proteolytic action of the sodium hypochlorite, generating a differentiated dentin substrate and, consequently, improving the adhesion of the restoration.…”

“…In this sense, the latest generation composite resins can be used indirectly, thus facilitating access to people who cannot afford the laboratorial costs. 3 In general, indirect resinous restorations have a number of advantages, such as: greater longevity when compared to direct restorations; possibilities for repair; adjustment and intra-buccal polishing. 4 These indirect composite restorations are a great alternative for large restorations of posterior teeth.…”

Restorative nanomaterials in dentistry

“…Недостатки коллагена: нестабильность коллагена делает адгезивный протокол чувствительным к технике исполнения [20]; низкая свободная энергия может снижать инфильтрацию мономера через нанопространства коллагеновой сетки [21]; поверхностный коллаген содержит воду, которая способствует гидролизу полимерной матрицы эстеразами [22]; металлопротеиназы и цистеиновые катепсины кол-лагена способствуют деградации гибридного слоя, обра-зованного адгезивом [23,24]. Некоторые исследователи уже предложили удаление коллагена с поверхности деми-нерализованного дентина как путь оптимизации адгезив- Согласно гидродинамической теории M. Brannstrom [29], наиболее эффективный путь исключения влияния жидкости -блокировка дентинных канальцев [30].…”

Evaluation of Push Out Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Post Related With Ultrasonic Irrigation

“…According to Barbosa et al, the study shown that the use of irrigant before cementation with self-adhesive cement allow the dentinal tubule to open for better adhesion. 16 Gu et al shown that EDTA could effectively improve the bond strength of the self-etching adhesive resin cement compare to NaOCl. 14 Marques et al shown that NaOCl alone may have oxidizing effect that might decrease bond strength.…”