1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(98)00003-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of HEMA on water evaporation from water–HEMA mixtures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
153
1
26

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 222 publications
(182 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
153
1
26
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, when HEMA is included, a progressive decrease in the partial pressure of water is produced. 42 As the partial pressure drops, it becomes more and more difficult for residual water to be removed from the demineralized dentin, and the hydrophobic Bis-GMA monomer resists diffusion into sites that contain residual water, producing an incom- plete adhesive diffusion through the demineralised dentin. 43 Previous studies on dentin adhesion described similar results when SBMP and Clearfil agents were compared.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, when HEMA is included, a progressive decrease in the partial pressure of water is produced. 42 As the partial pressure drops, it becomes more and more difficult for residual water to be removed from the demineralized dentin, and the hydrophobic Bis-GMA monomer resists diffusion into sites that contain residual water, producing an incom- plete adhesive diffusion through the demineralised dentin. 43 Previous studies on dentin adhesion described similar results when SBMP and Clearfil agents were compared.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the conjugation of the effects (a, b) determines the spatial anisotropy of the curing kinetics. It was already shown that the rate of water evaporation from water-HEMA mixtures decreases as the HEMA concentration rises [19] and that the presence of excess residual water may adversely affect the polymerization of the adhesives [20]. This observation does not rule out the presence of other kind of chemical interaction-inhibition, which, if present, would affect uniformly the shape of the profile.…”
Section: Article In Pressmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Ethanol has a higher vapor pressure than water, enhancing its evaporation and creating wider interfibrilar spaces for impregnation of hydrophobic monomers to form a more stable hybrid layer. 213,214,215 Basically, ethanol dehydrates the demineralized collagen matrix and coaxes hydrophobic monomers into it. 216 This technique also prevents phase separation of hydrophobic resin monomers in the presence of water, 217,218,219 since the latter is completely replaced by ethanol prior to the application of the ethanolsoluble monomers.…”
Section: Ethanol -Wet Bondingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…220,221 Additionally, the elimination of residual water seems to contribute to decrease or even eliminate hydrolytic enzymatic degradation of collagen fibrils, 212,222 thereby increasing bond durability and stability. 213 However, this technique is very sensitive, time consuming and requires the application of many steps to achieve the desired dehydration, which becomes inappropriate. More studies are necessary to improve this protocol for clinical use.…”
Section: Ethanol -Wet Bondingmentioning
confidence: 99%