Forte Annamaria, Baena Eugenia, Mazzitelli Claudia, Mancuso Edoardo, D'Urso Diego, Pellegrino Gerardo, Ceballos Laura, Breschi Lorenzo, Mazzoni Annalisa, Maravic Tatjana
Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Via San Vitale 59, 40125 Bologna, Italy.
IDIBO Research Group, Nursing and Stomatology Department, Rey Juan Carlos University, Avda. Atenas s/n, 28922 Madrid, Spain.
Polymers (Basel). 2025 Apr 29;17(9):1224. doi: 10.3390/polym17091224.
New dual-curing resin cements are constantly launched into the market to improve the bond strength between dentine and indirect restorations when light irradiation is limited by the restoration material. The present study evaluated the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of two dual-cured resin cements, Estecem II Plus (EP) and Variolink Esthetic DC (VAR), when resin composite or dentine substrates were conditioned with their corresponding universal adhesives, Tokuyama Universal Bond II (TUB) and Adhese Universal DC (ADH). The experimental groups ( = 20) were (1) TUB/EP light-cured, (2) TUB/EP self-cured, (3) ADH/VAR light-cured, and (4) ADH/VAR self-cured. A μSBS test was performed after 24 h (T0) or after thermocycling (TC), and failure modes were assessed. Data analysis was performed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey tests ( < 0.05). In composite, TUB/EP self-cured demonstrated the highest μSBS at T0 and TC. After TC, TUB/EP self-cured and ADH/VAR light-cured remained stable ( > 0.05). In dentine, TUB/EP light-cured was statistically superior to TUB/EP self-cured and ADH/VAR self-cured at T0. Thermocycling decreased the μSBS of light-curing groups. TUB/EP achieved optimal μSBS when the manufacturer's instructions were followed and the adhesive was self-cured, irrespective of the bonding substrate. However, ADH/VAR was more dependent on the type of bonding substrate than on the curing mode of the resin cement.
新型双固化树脂水门汀不断投放市场,以在光照射受修复材料限制时提高牙本质与间接修复体之间的粘结强度。本研究评估了两种双固化树脂水门汀Estecem II Plus(EP)和Variolink Esthetic DC(VAR)在树脂复合材料或牙本质基底用其相应的通用粘结剂Tokuyama Universal Bond II(TUB)和Adhese Universal DC(ADH)处理后的微剪切粘结强度(μSBS)。实验组(n = 20)为:(1)TUB/EP光固化,(2)TUB/EP自固化,(3)ADH/VAR光固化,(4)ADH/VAR自固化。在24小时(T0)或热循环(TC)后进行μSBS测试,并评估失败模式。使用三因素方差分析和Tukey检验进行数据分析(P < 0.05)。在复合材料中,TUB/EP自固化在T0和TC时显示出最高的μSBS。热循环后,TUB/EP自固化和ADH/VAR光固化保持稳定(P > 0.05)。在牙本质中,TUB/EP光固化在T0时在统计学上优于TUB/EP自固化和ADH/VAR自固化。热循环降低了光固化组中的μSBS。当遵循制造商的说明且粘结剂为自固化时,无论粘结基底如何,TUB/EP均能实现最佳的μSBS。然而,ADH/VAR对粘结基底类型的依赖性大于对树脂水门汀固化模式的依赖性。