The bond strength of adhesive resins to AH plus contaminated dentin cleaned by various gutta-percha solvents

Topçuoğlu, Hüseyin Sinan; Demirbuğa, Sezer; Pala, Kanşad; Cayabatmaz, Muhammed; Topçuoğlu, Gamze

doi:10.1002/sca.21190

Cited by 17 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, bonding to dentine involves the formation of a hybrid layer, which may be affected when the dentine surface is contaminated . Specifically, the bond strength of dentine adhesives is lower when the dentine surface is impregnated by oil, haemostatic agents, temporary filling material or endodontic sealer residues , specifically eugenol‐containing products. Sealer remnants in the pulp chamber may also lead to crown discolouration .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the manufacturer has stated that it contains formamide, a potential teratogen . Root canal sealer solvents may potentially negatively affect the bond strength of adhesive resins due to some chemical interaction with adhesives or dentine substrates . These solvents may also positively affect the bond strength of adhesive resins because they facilitate the removal of sealer remnants more safely .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of different sealer removal protocols on the bond strength of AH plus‐contaminated dentine to a bulk‐fill composite

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The integrity of composite bonding for post-endodontic restorations may be compromised by sealer contamination. This study assessed the effect of different sealer removal regimes on the bond strength of dentine to composite resin. Dentine surfaces were contaminated with AH Plus sealer (Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany), followed by removal with either dry cotton pellets, cotton pellets saturated with 95% ethanol, AH Plus cleaner or external surface preparation. Dentine surfaces were not contaminated in a positive control group. A bulk-fill composite (SDR; Dentsply) was bonded with Prime&Bond active universal adhesive (Dentsply) onto the prepared surface. Composite resin-dentine beams were produced, and tensile bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine. Using an etch-and-rinse adhesive, bond strengths varied from 21.34 to 29.11 MPa with no statistical differences among removal protocols. In conclusion, contamination by AH Plus sealer does not appear to substantially interfere with bond strength between dentine and a bulk-fill composite/etch-and-rinse system.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of different sealer removal protocols on the bond strength of AH plus‐contaminated dentine to a bulk‐fill composite

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various methods have been tested to remove the root canal sealer remnants from the pulp chamber; orange solvent, chloroform and xylene on a cotton pellet,[ 8 ] solvents like formamide, 2-phenylethanol (Endosolv R) and 95% ethanol,[ 9 ] isopropyl alcohol, 95% ethanol, acetone and amyl acetate solution[ 10 ] and dry cotton, chloroform, orange oil, eucalyptol, and ethanol. [ 11 ] In routine endodontic practice, root canal sealer remnants are removed from the walls of the pulp chamber by rinsing with water and drying with a dry cotton pellet. However, complete removal of the root canal sealer remnants from the pulp chamber is often strenuous clinically 2 , and sometimes remnants are present due to iatrogenic inadequate manipulations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of coronal discoloration induced by root canal sealer remnants using Dentin Bonding agent: An in vitro study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Among the various causes of tooth discoloration after root canal treatment, percolation of sealer remnants into the dentinal tubules of the pulp chamber is the most common cause.Objectives:The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of dentin bonding agent (DBA) in preventing coronal discoloration caused by four different root canal sealers- MTA Fillapex, Sealapex, Zical and Z. O. B seal at different time intervals by measuring chromatic alterations using digital images analysis method.Methodology:Ninety mandibular premolars were collected and sectioned at 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction. Standard access cavity preparations of dimensions (depth-3 mm, width-0.8 mm, and length-3 mm) were prepared with a No. 245 bur through the cervical access. Following the standard irrigation protocol, specimens were then randomly divided into nine groups (four groups without DBA [1–4] +4 groups with DBA [5–8] +1 negative control [9]). In Groups 1–4, four different root canal sealers (MTA Fillapex, Sealapex, Zical, and Z.O.B seal) were applied to the walls of the pulp chamber. For Groups 5–8, the samples were etched with 37% phosphoric acid and DBA application was done before the respective root canal sealer application. The cervical access in all specimens was sealed using glass ionomer cement. Digital photographs were taken under standard lighting and environmental conditions at different time intervals: preprocedural, postprocedural, and after 1, 2, 3, and 4 months. These images were analyzed using Adobe Photoshop CS6 from which laboratory values and subsequently Delta E values were obtained.Results:Statistical analysis performed using repeated measures ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's tests show that the groups with DBA application had significantly lower mean Delta E values (P < 0.05) compared to the groups without DBA application.Conclusion:DBAs applied to the dentinal walls of the pulp chamber before obturation can effectively reduce the sealer-induced coronal discoloration.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, endodontic irrigants or root canal filling materials can adversely affect the bonding of adhesives to pulp chamber dentin. This happens either by inhibiting polymerization of resins at the dentin–adhesive interface or by changing the mechanical and physical properties of dentin itself 20, 21, 22. Although some studies have evaluated the bonding ability of restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin in permanent dention,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 to the best of our knowledge, no published study has evaluated the adhesion of restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin in primary dentition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This happens either by inhibiting polymerization of resins at the dentin–adhesive interface or by changing the mechanical and physical properties of dentin itself 20, 21, 22. Although some studies have evaluated the bonding ability of restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin in permanent dention,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 to the best of our knowledge, no published study has evaluated the adhesion of restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin in primary dentition. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of three adhesive restorative materials to pulp chamber dentin in primary teeth: (1) composite, Clearfil Tri-S Bond + Clearfil Photo Posterior (self-etch); (2) compomer, Prime Bond NT + Dyract EXTRA (total etch); and (3) RMGI, GC, Fuji II LC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of endodontic sealers on bond strength of restorative systems to primary tooth pulp chamber

Elbay

Tosun

2017

Journal of Dental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/purpose Although current literature suggests that root canal sealers affect the bonding ability of restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin of permanent teeth, primary teeth have not been investigated. This study intended to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of three restorative systems to pulp chamber dentin in primary teeth and to determine the effect of two different root canal sealers on the μTBS. Materials and methods Ninety primary molars were used in this study. The teeth were randomly divided into three main groups according to canal sealers: (1) control (without sealer); (2) Metapex; and (3) zinc-oxide eugenol. The main groups were further divided into three subgroups depending on the coronal restorative system: (1) compomer (Prime Bond NT + Dyract EXTRA); (2) composite (Clearfil Tri-S Bond + Clearfil Photo Posterior); and (3) resin-modified glass ionomer (Fuji II LC). After restoration, the buccal wall of the pulp chamber was sectioned to obtain sticks (1 mm × 1 mm). The μTBS was then measured. Data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance, followed by a posthoc test. The interfacial morphology of the bonded space was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy. Results In the control group, a significant difference was observed only for the μTBS of the composite (P < 0.05). Compared with the control groups, Metapex and zinc-oxide eugenol significantly reduced the μTBS of restorative systems (P < 0.05). Conclusion Composite materials seemed to bond to pulp chamber dentin in primary teeth with a higher strength than compomer and resin-modified glass ionomer. Metapex and zinc-oxide eugenol canal filling materials reduced the bond strength of all three restorative systems.

show abstract

The bond strength of adhesive resins to AH plus contaminated dentin cleaned by various gutta-percha solvents

Cited by 17 publications

References 17 publications

The effect of different sealer removal protocols on the bond strength of AH plus‐contaminated dentine to a bulk‐fill composite

The effect of different sealer removal protocols on the bond strength of AH plus‐contaminated dentine to a bulk‐fill composite

Prevention of coronal discoloration induced by root canal sealer remnants using Dentin Bonding agent: An in vitro study

Effect of endodontic sealers on bond strength of restorative systems to primary tooth pulp chamber

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About