EC Dental Science

Research Article Volume 22 Issue 8 - 2023

Influence of an Extra Bonding Layer on Immediate and Delayed Shear Bond Strength of Two Different Universal Adhesives to Dentin: An In Vitro Study

Madeha Umar1, Rajni Nagpal2*, Udai Pratap Singh3 and Sakshi Saumya1

1PG Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
2Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
3Head of Department, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

*Corresponding Author: Rajni Nagpal, Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Received: May 22, 2023; Published: July 24, 2023




Aim: To evaluate the effect of an extra bonding layer on immediate and delayed shear bond strength of two different universal adhesives to dentin.

Materials and Methods: Flat coronal dentin surfaces were prepared in 100 extracted human molars. Teeth were randomly divided into four experimental groups (n = 20) according to two different universal adhesives applied with or without an extra bonding layer (EBL) of Scotch Bond Multipurpose adhesive (SBM) and one control group: Group 1: Control (SBM etch and rinse adhesive); Group 2: Prime and bond universal (PBU); Group 3: PBU+ EBL; Group 4: Tetric N bond universal (TNBU); Group 5: TNBU + EBL. After composite restoration, samples were subjected to 24 hrs and 6 months shear bond strength evaluation. Statistical analysis was done using two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's test (p < 0.05).

Results: PBU depicted comparable immediate bond strength to SBM. TNBU presented significantly lower bond strength than SBM. After 6 months, a significant fall in bond strength was observed for all adhesives without EBL. Mean difference between immediate and delayed bond strength was found to be significant for group 1 (0.007), group 2 (p = 0.001), group 4 (0.002), and group 5 (p = 0.001), while it was non-significant for group 3 (p = 0.076) with EBL.

Conclusion: Application of EBL improved the immediate bond strength as well as significantly preserved the bond strength of PBU over 6 months of storage. EBL application could not prevent the fall in bond strength for TNBU adhesive over 6 months.

Clinical Relevance: Application of EBL over universal adhesive may improve the durability of resin-dentin bond.

Keywords: Extra Bonding Layer; Prime and Bond Universal; Tetric N Bond Universal; Resin-Dentin Bond

  1. Chen C., et al. “Bonding of universal adhesives to dentine - Old wine in new bottles?” Journal of Dentistry 43 (2015): 525-536.
  2. De Munck J., et al. “Meta-analytical review of parameters involved in dentin bonding”. Journal of Dental Research 91 (2012): 351-357.
  3. Van Meerbeek B., et al. “Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes”. Dental Materials 26 (2010): 100-121.
  4. Hanabusa M., et al. “Bonding effectiveness of a new ‘multi-mode’ adhesive to enamel and dentine”. Journal of Dentistry 40 (2012): 475-484.
  5. Yiu CK., et al. “Solvent and water retention in dental adhesive blends after evaporation”. Biomaterials34 (2005): 6863-6872.
  6. Loguercio AD., et al. “Effect of solvent removal on adhesive properties of simplified etch-and-rinse systems and on bond strengths to dry and wet dentin”. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry3 (2009): 213-219.
  7. Marchesi G., et al. “Adhesive performance of a multi-mode adhesive system: 1-year in vitro study”. Journal of Dentistry5 (2014): 603-612.
  8. Nunes TG., et al. “Spatially resolved photopolymerization kinetics and oxygen inhibition in dental adhesives”. Biomaterials14 (2005): 1809-1817.
  9. Pashley EL., et al. “Effects of one versus two applications of an unfilled, all-in-one adhesive on dentine bonding”. Journal of Dentistry2-3 (2002): 83-90.
  10. Albuquerque M., et al. “Effect of double-application or the application of a hydrophobic layer for improved efficacy of one-step self-etch systems in enamel and dentin”. Operative Dentistry5 (2008): 564-570.
  11. Reis A., et al. “Can the durability of one-step self-etch adhesives be improved by double application or by an extra layer of hydrophobic resin?” Journal of Dentistry5 (2008): 309-315.
  12. King NM., et al. “Conversion of one-step to two-step self-etch adhesives for improved efficacy and extended application”. Journal of the American Dental Association2 (2005): 126-134.
  13. Muñoz MA., et al. “Influence of a hydrophobic resin coating on the bonding efficacy of three universal adhesives”. Journal of Dentistry5 (2014): 595-602.
  14. Perdigão J., et al. “Immediate adhesive properties to dentin and enamel of a universal adhesive associated with a hydrophobic resin coat”. Operative Dentistry5 (2014): 489-499.
  15. Vinagre A., et al. “Bonding performance of a universal adhesive: Effect of hydrophobic resin coating and long-term water storage”. The Revista Portuguesa de Estomatologia, Medicina Dentária e Cirurgia Maxilofacial 60 (2019): 96-103.
  16. Fuentes MV., et al. “Effect of an additional bonding resin on the 5-year performance of a universal adhesive: a randomized clinical trial”. Clinical Oral Investigations2 (2023): 837-848.
  17. Muñoz MA., et al. “In vitro longevity of bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentin”. Operative Dentistry3 (2015): 282-292.
  18. Sezinando A., et al. “Influence of a hydrophobic resin coating on the immediate and 6-month dentin bonding of three universal adhesives”. Dental Materials10 (2015): e236-e246.
  19. Pradeep S., et al. “Evaluation of shear bond strength of various adhesives under Simulated intrapulpal pressure: An in vitro study”. Journal of Conservative Dentistry2 (2021): 169-173.
  20. Hardan L., et al. “Effect of Active Bonding Application after Selective Dentin Etching on the Immediate and Long-Term Bond Strength of Two Universal Adhesives to Dentin”. Polymers6 (2022): 1129.
  21. Ahmed AA., et al. “Microshear bond strength of universal adhesives to dentin used in total-etch and self-etch modes”. Tanta Dental Journal2 (2018): 91.
  22. Torkabadi S., et al. “Bonding durability of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing one-step adhesives to dentine surrounded by bonded enamel”. The Journal of Dentistry1 (2008): 80-86.
  23. Kawazu M., et al. “Comparison of dentin bond durability of a universal adhesive and two etch-and-rinse adhesive systems”. Clinical Oral Investigations8 (2020): 2889-2889.
  24. Ermis RB., et al. “Universal adhesives benefit from an extra hydrophobic adhesive layer when light cured beforehand”. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry2 (2019): 179-188.
  25. Van Landuyt KL., et al. “Origin of interfacial droplets with one-step adhesives”. Journal of Dental Research8 (2007): 739-744.
  26. Cadenaro M., et al. “Degree of conversion and permeability of dental adhesives”. European Journal of Oral Sciences 113 (2005): 525-530.
  27. Yoshida Y., et al. “HEMA inhibits interfacial nano-layering of the functional monomer MDP”. Journal of Dental Research 91 (2012): 1060-1065.

Rajni Nagpal., et al. "Influence of an Extra Bonding Layer on Immediate and Delayed Shear Bond Strength of Two Different Universal Adhesives to Dentin: An In Vitro Study ". EC Dental Science 22.8 (2023): 01-08.

ECronicon Journal

Our Services

Quick Links

Information

Creative Commons LicenseOpen Access by ECronicon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Based on a work at www.ecronicon.net