Cardoso Gabriela Cardoso de, Nakanishi Leina, Isolan Cristina Pereira, Jardim Patrícia Dos Santos, Moraes Rafael Ratto de
Graduate Program in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, UFPEL - Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.
Braz Dent J. 2019 Oct 7;30(5):467-475. doi: 10.1590/0103-6440201902578. eCollection 2019.
This study evaluated the immediate and 6-month dentin bond strength of universal adhesives used in etch-and-rinse or self-etch bonding strategies. The adhesives tested were Ambar Universal, G-Bond, Single Bond Universal, Tetric N-Bond Universal, and Ybond Universal. Gold standard adhesives (Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus and Clearfil SE Bond) were controls. Microtensile dentin bond strength (n=5 teeth), pH, and C=C conversion (n=3) were evaluated. Data were analyzed at α=0.05. All adhesives showed differences in pH. Ybond had intermediately strong aggressiveness, whereas the others were ultra-mild. The C=C conversion was different in most adhesives. In the etch-and-rinse strategy, all adhesives showed similar results generally except for G-Bond, which had lower bond strength than most adhesives. G-Bond and Tetric-N-Bond showed lower bond strengths after 6 months compared with 24 h, whereas the other adhesives had stable dentin bonds. In the self-etch strategy, G-Bond had lower bond strength than most adhesives. After 6 months, Ambar was the only adhesive showing lower dentin bond strength compared with 24 h. Most adhesives had discreet drops in bond strength during aging when used in the self-etch strategy. The failure modes were also material dependent, with a general pattern of increased adhesive and/or pre-testing failures after storage. In conclusion, the bonding performance of universal adhesives to dentin is material dependent. Most adhesives had stable dentin bonds with results comparable to the gold standard materials, particularly when applied in the self-etch mode. In general, it seems the use of universal adhesives in dentin should not be preceded by phosphoric acid etching.
本研究评估了用于酸蚀冲洗或自酸蚀粘结策略的通用粘结剂的即时和6个月牙本质粘结强度。所测试的粘结剂有Ambar通用粘结剂、G-Bond粘结剂、单键通用粘结剂、Tetric N-Bond通用粘结剂和Ybond通用粘结剂。金标准粘结剂(Scotchbond多功能增强型粘结剂和Clearfil SE粘结剂)作为对照。评估了微拉伸牙本质粘结强度(n = 5颗牙齿)、pH值和C=C转化率(n = 3)。数据以α=0.05进行分析。所有粘结剂的pH值均有差异。Ybond具有中等强度的侵蚀性,而其他粘结剂则为超温和型。大多数粘结剂的C=C转化率不同。在酸蚀冲洗策略中,除G-Bond粘结强度低于大多数粘结剂外,所有粘结剂总体上显示出相似的结果。与24小时相比,G-Bond和Tetric-N-Bond在6个月后的粘结强度较低,而其他粘结剂的牙本质粘结稳定。在自酸蚀策略中,G-Bond的粘结强度低于大多数粘结剂。6个月后,Ambar是唯一与24小时相比牙本质粘结强度降低的粘结剂。大多数粘结剂在自酸蚀策略中老化时粘结强度有明显下降。失效模式也取决于材料,储存后粘结剂和/或预测试失败的总体模式增加。总之,通用粘结剂与牙本质的粘结性能取决于材料。大多数粘结剂的牙本质粘结稳定,结果与金标准材料相当,特别是在自酸蚀模式下应用时。一般来说,在牙本质中使用通用粘结剂之前似乎不应进行磷酸酸蚀。