Assessment of current adhesives in class I cavity: Nondestructive imaging using optical coherence tomography and microtensile bond strength

Author(s)

Makishi, Patricia ^[1] ; Thitthaweerat, Suppason ^[2] ; Sadr, Alireza ^[3] ; Shimada, Yasushi ^[4] ; Martins, Adriano Luis ^{[5, 6]} ; Tagami, Junji ^[4] ; Giannini, Marcelo ^[7]

Affiliation

^[1] Univ Estadual Campinas, Dent Mat Div, Dept Restorat Dent, Piracicaba Dent Sch, BR-13414903 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil

^[2] Mahidol Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Operat Dent & Endodont, Bangkok 10700 - Thailand

^[3] Univ Washington, Sch Dent, Dept Restorat Dent, Seattle, WA 98195 - USA

^[4] Tokyo Med & Dent Univ, Cariol & Operat Dent, Dept Restorat Sci, Tokyo - Japan

^[5] Univ Estadual Campinas, Piracicaba Dent Sch, Dept Oral Diag, BR-13414903 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil

^[6] Univ Estadual Campinas, Piracicaba Dent Sch, Dept Morphol, Microscopy & Image Ctr, BR-13414903 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil

^[7] Univ Estadual Campinas, Piracicaba Dent Sch, Operat Dent Div, Dept Restorat Dent, BR-13414903 Piracicaba, SP - Brazil

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: Dental Materials; v. 31, n. 9, p. E190-E200, SEP 2015.
• Web of Science Citations: 12

Abstract

Objectives. To evaluate the sealing ability and the microtensile bond strength (MTBS) of different adhesive systems bonded to dentin in class I cavities. Methods. Round tapered dentin cavities (3-mm diameter, 1.5-mm height) prepared in extracted human molars were restored using composite resin (Clearfil Majesty Posterior) with two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system (Adper Single Bond 2: ASB2), two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond: CSEB), all-in-one adhesives (G-Bond Plus: GBP; Tri-S Bond Plus: TSBP), or no adhesive (Control), or bonded using low-shrinkage composite with its proper adhesive (Filtek Silorane, Silorane Adhesive System: FSS). After 24-h water storage or 10,000 cycles of thermal stress, the specimens were immersed into a contrast agent. Two and three-dimensional images were obtained using optical coherence tomography (OCT). The mean percentage of high brightness (HB%) at the interfacial zone in cross-sectional images was calculated as an indicator of contrast agent or gap at the interface. The specimens were then sectioned into beams and the MTBS measured. Results. The HB% (ASB2 = TSBP = CSEB < FSS = GBP) and MTBS (CSEB = ASB2, CSEB > TSBP = GBP = FSS, ASB2 > FSS) differed significantly among the adhesives. After aging, HB% increased for GBP and FSS specimens, and the MTBS decreased for FSS specimens (ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc, p < 0.05). The HB% and MTBS were significantly and negatively correlated (p = 0.002). Confocal laser scanning and scanning electron micrographs confirmed contrast agent infiltration within the gap. Signficance. There was a significant correlation between sealing performance and bond strength of the adhesives in the whole cavity. After aging, the two-step systems showed equal or superior performance to the all-in-one and Silorane systems. (C) 2015 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 12/18583-0 - Evaluation of adhesive-dentin interface, 2D and 3D imaging of marginal adaptation of class I composite restorations
• Grantee: Patricia Makishi
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research Internship - Post-doctor
• FAPESP's process: 11/22093-5 - Evaluation of adhesive/dentin interface, 2D and 3D imaging of marginal adaptation of Class I composite restorations and their bond-strength
• Grantee: Patricia Makishi
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral