Effects of blood contamination on the shear bond strengths of conventional and hydrophilic primers

Cacciafesta, Vittorio; Sfondrini, Maria Francesca; Scribante, Andrea; Angelis, Marco De; Klersy, Catherine

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.06.022

Cited by 39 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When that happens, bonding may be affected. 4 Some studies found a greater decrease in bond strength when contamination occurred after acidetching; in such cases, re-etching of the enamel surface was necessary. 5,14,16 The contamination of the etched area by saliva or blood leads to the sealing of most of the porosity created by enamel acid-etching, which prevents the penetration of the adhesive material, resulting in insufficient resin tags in both number and length, and compromises bonding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,5,16 Enamel surface contamination may occur at two critical time points during bonding: After etching or after adhesive application. When that happens, bonding may be affected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,5 In other studies, shear bond strength trials were conducted 24 hours after bonding. 3,4,11,17 The substrate used in our study was bovine tooth enamel, as in other studies. 4,5,13,16 Bovine teeth are anatomically, histologically and chemically similar to human teeth, although bond strength result shows to be lower than those of human teeth.…”

Section: E5mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,4,11,17 The substrate used in our study was bovine tooth enamel, as in other studies. 4,5,13,16 Bovine teeth are anatomically, histologically and chemically similar to human teeth, although bond strength result shows to be lower than those of human teeth. 8,9 In this study, the samples used for the bond strength trial were cylinders made of Transbond™ XT composite resin.…”

Section: E5mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5,6 However, when used in moist environments, its advantages over Transbond™ XT (3M Unitek Dental Products, Monrovia, CA), a conventional adhesive system, remain controversial. 4,15,16 In a dry environment, both have similar bond strength, 4,5,15,17 but Transbond™ MIP may present a significantly higher bond strength than necessary for bonding (18.31 MPa), 13 which may damage the enamel during debonding. Adhesive materials should have shear bond strengths compatible to the clinical needs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Influence of saliva contamination on the shear bond strength of adhesives on enamel

Assad-Loss¹,

Tostes²,

Mucha³

2012

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Influence of saliva contamination on the shear bond strength of adhesives on enamel original articleObjective: To evaluate shear bond strength of 3 adhesive systems (Single Bond, Transbond™ MIP and Transbond™ XT) applied on bovine enamel under saliva contamination condition. Method:One hundred and twenty enamel surfaces of bovine incisors were divided into 6 groups (n = 20) according to the adhesive system used (Transbond™ XT, Transbond™ MIP and Single Bond) with or without saliva contamination. For each adhesive system, there were two groups defined as no contamination group (NC): 37% H 3 PO 4 conditioning for 30 seconds and two layers of adhesive systems; saliva contamination group (SC): After the first adhesive layer application, the examined areas were contaminated with saliva. Samples were mounted appropriately for testing and stored in deionized water at 37 °C for 7 days. Samples were then submitted to shear bond strength trials at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was evaluated under stereomicroscopy. Twoway analysis of variance and the Tukey test were used to compare mean values (α = 0.05).Results: Groups XT (NC) = 26.29 ± 7.23; MIP (NC) = 24.47 ± 7.52 and SB (NC) = 32.36 ± 4.14 XT (SC) = 19.59 ± 6.76; MIP (SC) = 18.08 ± 6.39 and SB (SC) = 18.18 ± 7.03 MPa. ARI 0 and 1 were the most prevalent scores in all study groups examined. Conclusion:Saliva contamination significantly decreased bond strength of the three adhesive systems examined (p <0.05). However, the comparison of groups with and without saliva contamination did not reveal any significant differences, and, therefore, the three systems may be considered equivalent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,5,16 Enamel surface contamination may occur at two critical time points during bonding: After etching or after adhesive application. When that happens, bonding may be affected.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%