Effect of Double-application or the Application of a Hydrophobic Layer for Improved Efficacy of One-step Self-etch Systems in Enamel and Dentin

Albuquerque, Maurício; Pegoraro, Mariana; Mattei, Gracielle; Reis, Alessandra; Loguércio, Alessandro Dourado

doi:10.2341/07-145

Cited by 63 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…5,7,8,10,16 To overcome this early degradation, some investigations have revealed that the application of more hydrophobic resins over hybridized tissues provides better sealing of acid-etched dentin 9,18-21 and higher bond strength of composite to dentin. 19,20,22 In this study, the use of flowable resin or an additional layer of more hydrophobic adhesive did not improve the percentage dentin sealing of any type of adhesive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…16,17 To improve the sealing ability of one-step self-etching adhesives, some authors have suggested the application of an additional layer of hydrophobic material in an attempt to reduce the concentration of hydrophilic monomers to be light cured. 9,[18][19][20][21][22] The importance of studying dentin permeability in relation to the sealing ability of adhesive systems is that, besides bonding the restorative material to the tooth, adhesive systems are responsible for sealing the resin-dentin interface against microleakage and avoiding restorative material debonding, which could compromise the restorations. 2,16,17 The objective of this study was to measure fluid flow through the adhesive-dentin interfaces created by eight bonding agents using a permeability device.…”

Section: Declaration Of Interestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of adhesive system and application strategy on reduction of dentin permeability

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effect of adhesive systems and application strategies on dentin hydraulic conductance (HC). The buccal enamel was removed from bovine incisors to simulate laminate cavity preparations. After removing the roots and the coronal pulp, the buccal dentin was treated with EDTA solution (0.5 M) for 5 minutes, rinsed, ultrasonicated for 12 minutes and connected to a permeability device. HC of the specimens was measured at 10 psi (n = 5). Permeability was measured before and after bonding procedures using G-Bond (GB), Clearfil Tri-S Bond (CTS), Hybrid Coat (HY), Bond Force (BF), Adper Easy Bond (AEB) Silorane (SI), Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) and Adper Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (SMP) adhesives systems, which were applied following three strategies: 1) according to the manufacturers' instructions; 2) two coats of all-in-one self-etching adhesives (GB, CTS, HY, BF, AEB) or priming step plus two coats of bonding resin for the other systems (SI, CSE and SMP); and 3) a thin layer of a flowable composite applied over one coat of all-in-one self-etching adhesives or primed surface for SI, CSE and SMP adhesives. No significant difference was observed among the application modes concerning their ability to reduce HC. None of the adhesives showed complete sealing (100%) of the bovine tooth dentin. SI exhibited lower HC than SMP, however, they were not significantly different from the other systems. The results suggest that all systems tested result in an HC reduction of more than 90%. The wet bonding technique seemed to be more sensitive for dentin sealing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Declaration Of Interestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of adhesive system and application strategy on reduction of dentin permeability

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…147 To counteract this limitation of simplified adhesives, it has been proposed that the application of an additional layer of hydrophobic fluid resin should be incorporated to their bonding protocol. 24,148,149,150,151,152 This strategy proved to be effective in minimizing nanoleakage and improving the polymerization of simplified adhesives 150 as well as their immediate 40,146,150 and long-term 146 bond strength. It could also improve the sealing ability of two-step etch-and-rinse adhesives by reducing fluid conductance across the adhesive interface.…”

Section: Addition Of a Separate Hydrophobic Adhesive Resinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bonding efficiency and durability: current possibilities

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bonding plays a major role in dentistry nowadays. Dental adhesives are used in association with composites to solve many restorative issues. However, the wide variety of bonding agents currently available makes it difficult for clinicians to choose the best alternative in terms of material and technique, especially when different clinical situations are considered. Moreover, although bonding agents allow for a more conservative restorative approach, achieving a durable adhesive interface remains a matter of concern, and this mainly due to degradation of the bonding complex in the challenging oral environment. This review aims to present strategies that are being used or those still in development which may help to prevent degradation. It is fundamental that professionals are aware of these strategies to counteract degradation as much as possible. None of them are efficient to completely solve this problem, but they certainly represent reasonable alternatives to increase the lifetime of adhesive restorations.

show abstract

“…The latest generation all-in-one adhesive have combined these steps into a single-step application for simpler and faster application [3][4][5][6]. All-in-one adhesive are mixtures of hydrophobic and hydrophilic monomers and solvents, combining etching, priming and bonding into a single product [3,[7][8][9]. They are mixed together immediately before use and then applied to tooth substrate and some of them were presented as a mixture of these adhesives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Applying an additional adhesive layer can increase acidic monomer concentration and this may lead to improve the demineralization effect, hybrid layer quality and better micromechanical bonding [4,8,10,14].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Microtensile Bond Strength of One vs Two Layer Applications of Three Disposable Seventh Generation Adhesives

Öznurhan

2015

J Dent Probl Solut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of single versus two layers of three different 7 th generation adhesives. Materials and Methods:One third of the human molar teeth from the coronal portion was removed and smear layer was created on these surfaces by using Silicone carbide paper. Adper Easy Bond (AEB), ClearfilS3 bond Single Dose (CS3) and Optibond Unidose (OB) were applied to flat dentin according to the manufacturer's instructions. Six groups; Group1: single application of AEB, Group2: twice application of AEB Group3: single application of CS3, Group4: twice application of CS3 Bond Group5: single application of OB, Group6: twice application of OB, were obtained. After applying adhesive, resin composite crowns were build up in 1mm increments up to 5 mm. After storage in distillated water for 24 hour (h), the specimens were sectioned to sticks and 15 sticks were obtained for each group. The sticks were stressed in tension until failure to see the microtensile bond strength values using a microtensile testing machine and the data were recorded. After recording data in SPSS 15.0, statistical analyses were made with ANOVA, Independent Sample T test and Tukey's post-hoc test at 0.05 level of significance.Results: Significant differences were not found among the G1, G3, G5 (p>0.05). G6 exhibited significantly higher µTBS compared to the G2 and G4 (p<0.001). No significant differences were found among the groups regarding the failure types between cohesive or adhesive (p>0.05). Lower µTBS values were observed in two layer application when compared to the one layer application of AEB and CS3. G6 resulted in significantly higher µTBS values compared to G5 (p<0.001). Conclusion:The results of the current investigation showed that two layer applications would be beneficial depending on the composition of adhesive and dentin substrate.

show abstract

Effect of Double-application or the Application of a Hydrophobic Layer for Improved Efficacy of One-step Self-etch Systems in Enamel and Dentin

Abstract: The effects of using the double-application and placement of a hydrophobic resin coat on microtensile dentin-bond strength values seem to be effective; however, these techniques in enamel were adhesive-dependent.

Cited by 63 publications

References 22 publications

Effect of adhesive system and application strategy on reduction of dentin permeability

Effect of adhesive system and application strategy on reduction of dentin permeability

Bonding efficiency and durability: current possibilities

Microtensile Bond Strength of One vs Two Layer Applications of Three Disposable Seventh Generation Adhesives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About