DentalNet Research Group, School of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018 May;30(3):240-248. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12363. Epub 2018 Jan 26.
The aim of this study was to test long-term microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of 2 universal adhesives applied to dentin following "total-etch" (TE) or "self-etch" (SE) protocols and aged by direct or indirect water exposure using simulated pulpal pressure.
Single Bond Universal (SBU, 3M ESPE) or Ipera Bond (IP, Itena) were applied to mid-coronal dentin ("flat dentin") or Class I cavity ("cavity dentin") following TE or SE protocols in 112 extracted human third molars. Sixteen groups (n = 7 per group) were prepared, 8 groups for µTBS measurements after 24 hours, and further 8 groups for measurements after 6 months storage. "Cavity dentin" groups were subjected to simulated hydrostatic pulpal pressure of 15 cm H O using a custom-made device before cutting 1 × 1 mm sticks while "flat dentin" groups were cut into sticks and directly exposed to deionized water.
Generally, the TE protocol resulted in highest µTBS values on flat dentin initially for both adhesives (general linear model, P < .05). Long-term storage resulted in significantly lower µTBS values for the TE protocol (P < .05) while the SE protocol showed comparable values after 6 months (P > .05). "Cavity dentin" with simulated pulpal pressure resulted in lower µTBS than "flat dentin" (P < .05). For both adhesives, µTBS was in the range of 19-42 MPa initially and 16-36 MPa after 6 months storage.
µTBS to dentin of universal adhesives is more stable in the long term following the SE than TE protocol. Simulated pulpal pressure and cavity-type sample preparation may be recommended for µTBS testing as a more clinically relevant strategy.
Microtensile bond strength to dentin of universal adhesives appears more stable following the "self-etch" than "total-etch" protocol after long-term degradation. More clinically relevant data may be obtained using simulated pulpal pressure and cavity-type sample preparation in the study design.
本研究旨在测试两种通用粘结剂在“全酸蚀”（TE）或“自酸蚀”（SE）处理后应用于牙本质的长期微拉伸粘结强度（µTBS），并通过模拟牙髓压力下的直接或间接水暴露对其进行老化。
将单步粘结剂通用（SBU，3M ESPE）或 Ipera Bond（IP，Itena）分别应用于 112 颗人第三磨牙的近中冠牙本质（“平牙本质”）或 I 类洞牙本质（“洞牙本质”），采用 TE 或 SE 处理方案。共制备 16 个实验组（每组 n = 7），7 个实验组在 24 小时后进行 µTBS 测量，其余 8 个实验组在 6 个月储存后进行测量。“洞牙本质”组在使用定制设备施加 15 cm H2O 模拟静压牙髓压力后切割 1×1mm 小棒，而“平牙本质”组直接切割成小棒并暴露于去离子水中。
一般来说，两种粘结剂在初始时 TE 方案在平牙本质上均产生最高的 µTBS 值（一般线性模型，P<.05）。长期储存导致 TE 方案的 µTBS 值显著降低（P<.05），而 SE 方案在 6 个月后表现出可比值（P>.05）。模拟牙髓压力下的“洞牙本质”比“平牙本质”产生更低的 µTBS 值（P<.05）。对于两种粘结剂，初始时 µTBS 值在 19-42 MPa 范围内，储存 6 个月后在 16-36 MPa 范围内。
SE 方案比 TE 方案长期后通用粘结剂的牙本质 µTBS 更稳定。模拟牙髓压力和洞型样本制备可作为更具临床相关性的策略推荐用于 µTBS 测试。
长期降解后，通用粘结剂的牙本质 µTBS 似乎在 SE 方案下比 TE 方案更稳定。在研究设计中使用模拟牙髓压力和洞型样本制备可能会获得更具临床相关性的数据。
