Microshear bond strength of self-etching systems associated with a hydrophobic resin layer.

PURPOSE

To evaluate in vitro the microshear bond strength of adhesive systems applied to dentin according to manufacturers' instructions, associated or not with a hydrophobic layer of unfilled resin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Six self-etching adhesives (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray Medical; AdheSE, Ivoclar Vivadent; Xeno III, Dentsply; I Bond, Heraeus-Kulzer; Bond Force, Tokuyama; Futurabond DC, Voco) were tested. The labial dentin of sixty bovine incisors was exposed, and the teeth were divided into two groups according to the application or not of an extra hydrophobic resin layer (Scotchbond Multi Purpose Plus, bottle 3). Six composite cylinders (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE) were built up on each treated surface. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 h and then subjected to the microshear bond strength test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Microshear bond strength values were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test. Failure mode was determined using a stereomicroscope under 20X magnification.

RESULTS

The application of the hydrophobic resin layer did not affect bond strength, except for AdheSE. However, the bond strengths with the hydrophobic layer were similar among the six tested systems (Clearfil: 17.1 ± 7.9; AdheSE: 14.5 ± 7.1; Xeno lll: 12.8 ± 7.7; I Bond: 9.5 ± 5.8; Bond Force: 17.5 ± 4.1; Futurabond: 7.7 ± 2.3). When used as recommended by the manufacturers, Bond Force presented statistically higher bond strength than AdheSE and I Bond (p < 0.05) (Clearfil 10.4 ± 4.9; AdheSE 1.6 ± 1.6; Xeno lll: 9.0 ± 3.8; I Bond: 3.0 ± 1.5; Bond Force: 14 ± 3.9; Futurabond: 8.8 ± 3.8). Failure mode was predominantly adhesive.

CONCLUSION

The bond strength of the self-etching systems tested was not significantly affected by the application of a hydrophobic layer, but a significant improvement was observed in AdheSE.