Rafał Szymański1, *Joanna Nowak2, Karolina Kopacz3,4, Katarzyna Witkowska1, Dorota Rylska5, Jerzy Sokołowski1
Bond strength of composite to dentin using universal self-etching adhesive systems
Wytrzymałość połączenia materiałów kompozytowych z zębiną za pomocą uniwersalnych samotrawiących systemów wiążących
1Zakład Stomatologii Ogólnej, Katedra Stomatologii Odtwórczej, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi, Łódź, Polska
Kierownik: prof. dr hab. n. med. Jerzy Sokołowski
1Department of Restorative Dentistry, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
Head of Department: Professor Jerzy Sokolowski, MD, PhD
2Uczelniane Laboratorium Badań Materiałowych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi, Łódź, Polska
p. o. Kierownika: prof. dr hab. n. med. Jerzy Sokołowski
2University Laboratory of Materials Research, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
Head of Laboratory: Professor Jerzy Sokolowski, MD, PhD
3Uczelniane Laboratorium Ruchu i Wydolności Fizycznej Człowieka „DynamoLab”, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi, Łódź, Polska
Kierownik: dr n.med. Gianluca Padula
3Academic Laboratory of Movement and Human Physical Performance “DynamoLab”, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
Head of Laboratory: Gianluca Padula, PhD
4Wydział Nauk Medycznych, Warszawska Akademia Medyczna, Warszawa, Polska
Kierownik: dr hab. n. med. i n o zdr. Marek Łyp, profesor WAM
4Faculty of Medical Sciences, Warsaw Medical Academy, Warsaw, Poland
Head of Faculty: Professor Marek Łyp , PhD, Assosiate Professor
5Zakład Zaawansowanych Materiałów i Kompozytów, Instytut Inżynierii Materiałowej, Politechnika Łódzka, Łódź, Polska
Kierownik: prof. dr hab. inż. Łukasz Kaczmarek
5Institute of Materials Science and Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, Lodz, Poland
Head of Institute: Professor Łukasz Kaczmarek, PhD
Streszczenie
Wstęp. Wypełnienia stomatologiczne wykonane z materiałów kompozytowych stanowią w ostatnich latach ponad 40% wszystkich prac tego typu. Niestety, konieczność wymiany tych wypełnień z powodu próchnicy wtórnej pozostaje istotnym problemem. Badania nad systemami wiążącymi koncentrują się na uproszczeniu i przyspieszeniu procedur leczenia ubytków, przy jednoczesnym dążeniu do zwiększenia adhezji między tkankami zęba a materiałami odtwórczymi.
Cel pracy. Badanie ma na celu ocenę wytrzymałości połączenia kompozytu stomatologicznego z zębiną za pomocą systemów wiążących VIII generacji stosowanych w technikach self-etch lub total-etch w porównaniu z systemem V generacji.
Materiał i metody. Badaniu technologicznego ścinania z wykorzystaniem uniwersalnej maszyny wytrzymałościowej Z020 (Zwick/Roell) poddano 5 grup badanych (n = 11). Zębinę łączono ze światłoutwardzalnym materiałem kompozytowym X-flow (Dentsply Sirona) przy użyciu systemu Optibond Solo Plus (Kerr) w technice total-etch, Clearfil Universal Bond Quick w technikach total-etch i self-etch, a także G-Premio (GC) w technikach total-etch i self-etch. Analizę statystyczną przeprowadzono za pomocą programu Statistica v.13 (TIBCO Software Inc.).
Wyniki. Najwyższe wartości wytrzymałości połączenia zostały uzyskane z wykorzystaniem materiału Optibond Solo Plus w technice total-etch (Tmax = 29,50 ± 5,85 MPa), a najniższe G-Premio Bond w tej samej technice (Tmax = 8,86 ± 2,19 MPa). System Optibond Solo Plus wykazał istotnie wyższe wartości adhezji w porównaniu z pozostałymi materiałami, w których zastosowano technikę total-etch. Jednakże adhezja w tej grupie nie różniła się istotnie od wyników uzyskanych w technice self-etch dla pozostałych materiałów (p < 0,05).
Wnioski. Systemy VIII generacji w technice self-etch zapewniają porównywalną wytrzymałość połączenia z systemami V generacji w technice total-etch. Warto zatem rozważyć stosowanie systemów VIII generacji, które pozwalają uprościć i skrócić procedurę leczenia oraz zmniejszyć ryzyko powikłań.
Summary
Introduction. In recent years, dental restorations using composite materials have accounted for over 40% of all such procedures. However, the need to replace these restorations due to secondary caries remains a significant challenge. Research on adhesive systems has increasingly focused on simplifying and speeding up cavity treatment procedures while enhancing adhesion between tooth tissues and restorative materials.
Aim. This study aims to assess the bond strength of a dental composite to dentin using VII generation adhesive systems applied through self-etch or total-etch techniques, in comparison to a V generation system.
Material and methods. Shear bond strength testing was conducted on five experimental groups (n = 11) using a Z020 universal testing machine (Zwick/Roell). Dentin was bonded with the light-cured composite material X-flow (Dentsply Sirona) utilizing the Optibond Solo Plus system (Kerr) in the total-etch technique, Clearfil Universal Bond Quick in both total-etch and self-etch techniques, and G-Premio (GC) in both total-etch and self-etch techniques. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica v.13 (TIBCO Software Inc.).
Results. The highest bond strength values were observed with Optibond Solo Plus in the total-etch technique (Tmax = 29.50 ± 5.85 MPa), while the lowest values were recorded for G-Premio Bond in the same technique (Tmax = 8.86 ± 2.19 MPa). The Optibond Solo Plus system demonstrated significantly higher adhesion values compared to other materials used with the total-etch technique. However, adhesion in this group did not significantly differ from the results obtained using the self-etch technique for the other materials (p < 0.05).
Conclusions. VIII generation adhesive systems in the self-etch technique provide bond strength comparable to that of V generation systems in the total-etch technique. Thus, the use of VII generation systems should be considered, as they simplify and expedite treatment procedures while potentially reducing the risk of complications.
Introduction
More than 40% of all restorations used in the reconstruction of hard dental tissues are made of polymer composites (1). However, it should be noted that secondary caries has been the most common reason for their replacement (> 75%) over the years (2-9). Ensuring an effective bond of composite to dentin and/or enamel and, at the same time, simple application of restorative materials remains a therapeutic challenge. Research on bonding systems used to fix composite to hard tooth tissues is one of the popular directions of research aimed at achieving this goal. The research focuses on modifying their chemical composition to increase the strength of the bond between composites and tooth tissues, speed up the treatment process and facilitate their application (10).
The binding systems mainly contain methacrylate monomers, photoinitiators, polymerization inhibitors, stabilizers, solvents, and in some cases inorganic fillers (11). Their diversity in terms of composition, properties and application method makes their classification difficult. Classification by generation, which takes into account the time of formation, chemical composition and bond strength is most commonly used. Each generation aims to simplify the application and introduce new, innovative chemical compounds to create a more stable and durable bond with dentin (12).
Eight classes of bonding systems are currently distinguished (fig. 1) (13-15).
Fig 1. Classification of new-generation bonding systems
Providing a strong and durable bond with polymeric restorative materials is a major challenge due to the differences in chemical composition, physical properties, and morphology between more mineralized and homogeneous enamel and more hydrated and less homogeneous dentin (12). There are many cavity preparation techniques in dentistry aimed at achieving the most durable bond possible. Depending on the effect of the bonding system on the smear layer and enamel, the following approaches have been distinguished: Total-etch, Self-etch and Multi-mode, also known as the universal method (16). Due to the emergence of new materials on the dental market and the lack of clear scientific evidence, there is a need to conduct research on bond strength between dental tissues and dental composite for different generations of bonding materials and techniques.
Aim
The aim of the study was to assess the quality of bond between a composite and dentin obtained using universal self-etching bonding systems.
The null hypothesis assumed that there were no differences in bond strength between a composite and dentin when using the fifth- or eighth-generation bonding systems in total-etch and self-etch mode.
Material and methods
The study used dentin obtained from molars extracted for orthodontic indications. Before the study, the teeth were stored in a 1% solution of thymol, analytical grade (Pol-Aura) dissolved in 96% ethyl alcohol, analytical grade (Pol-Aura). Then, the teeth were cut using a Mecatome T-201A precision cutter (Presi) using water cooling to avoid thermal destruction of tissues during the process. This way, 55 samples were obtained, placed in cylindrical PVC moulds (d = 18 mm, h = 30 mm) and embedded in the self-polymerizing acrylic material Villacryl IT (Everall7). The next step was to expose the dentine for testing by grinding the surface of each sample on a Minitech-233 grinding and polishing machine (Presi), using successively silicon carbide sandpaper with grades P180, P320 and P600 and water cooling (17). The prepared samples were divided into 5 test groups (n = 11). The reference group consisted of samples with application of OptiBond Solo Plus (Kerr), which is 5th generation (total-etch) adhesive and is considered the so-called „gold standard” among bonding systems used in dentistry. In the other groups, universal 8th generation bonding systems were used: CLEARFIL™ Universal Bond Quick (Kuraray Noritake) and G-Premio Bond (GC), which were applied in total-etch or self-etch modes. Dentin samples prepared with the total-etch technique were etched with 37% orthophosphoric acid for 15 seconds. No additional acid treatment was used for self-etch samples. The group coding system is presented in table 1.
Tab. 1. Sample coding system for testing the shear bond strength between dentin and a composite agent
| Agent | Manufacturer | Mode | Code |
| OptiBond Solo Plus | Kerr | Total-etch | OBSP TE |
| CLEARFIL™ Universal Bond Quick | Kuraray Noritake | Self-etch | CUBQ SE |
| CLEARFIL™ Universal Bond Quick | Kuraray Noritake | Total-etch | CUBQ TE |
| G-Premio Bond | GC | Self-etch | GPB SE |
| G-Premio Bond | GC | Total-etch | GPB TE |
Powyżej zamieściliśmy fragment artykułu, do którego możesz uzyskać pełny dostęp.
Mam kod dostępu
- Aby uzyskać płatny dostęp do pełnej treści powyższego artykułu albo wszystkich artykułów (w zależności od wybranej opcji), należy wprowadzić kod.
- Wprowadzając kod, akceptują Państwo treść Regulaminu oraz potwierdzają zapoznanie się z nim.
- Aby kupić kod proszę skorzystać z jednej z poniższych opcji.
Opcja #1
29 zł
Wybieram
- dostęp do tego artykułu
- dostęp na 7 dni
uzyskany kod musi być wprowadzony na stronie artykułu, do którego został wykupiony
Opcja #2
69 zł
Wybieram
- dostęp do tego i pozostałych ponad 7000 artykułów
- dostęp na 30 dni
- najpopularniejsza opcja
Opcja #3
129 zł
Wybieram
- dostęp do tego i pozostałych ponad 7000 artykułów
- dostęp na 90 dni
- oszczędzasz 78 zł
Piśmiennictwo
1. Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE: Selection of restorative materials in permanent teeth in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand 1999; 57(5): 257-262.
2. Desai HR, Mulay SA, Shinde RR et al.: Comparative evaluation of eighth-generation bonding agent modified with 7% arginine and 0.12% chitosan for antibacterial property and microtensile bond strength. J Conserv Dent 2022; 25(4): 440.
3. Kidd EA: Caries diagnosis within restored teeth. Adv Dent Res 1990; 4: 10-13.
4. Burke F, Cheung S, Mjör I, Wilson N: Restoration longevity and analysis of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations provided by vocational dental practitioners and their trainers in the United Kingdom. Quintessence Int (Berl) 1999; 30(4): 234-242.
5. Frost PM: An audit on the placement and replacement of restorations in a general dental practice. Prim Dent Care 2002; 9(1): 31-36.
6. Tyas MJ: Placement and replacement of restorations by selected practitioners. Aust Dent J 2005; 50(2): 81-89.
7. Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE: Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice. Int Dent J 2000; 50(6): 361-366.
8. Chrysanthakopoulos NA: Placement, replacement and longevity of composite resin-based restorations in permanent teeth in Greece. Int Dent J 2012; 62(3): 161.
9. Eltahlah D: Reasons of replacement and repair of directly placed dental restorations: A systematic review. MPhil Thesis, Cardiff University 2020.
10. Hardan L, Bourgi R, Cuevas-Suárez CE et al.: Effect of Different Application Modalities on the Bonding Performance of Adhesive Systems to Dentin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cells 2023; 12(1): 190.
11. Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, De Munck J et al.: Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 2007; 28(26): 3757-3785.
12. Arandi NZ: The Classification and Selection of Adhesive Agents; an Overview for the General Dentist. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2023; 15: 165.
13. Kazak M, Dönmez N: Development of Dentin Bonding Systems from Past to Present. Bezmialem Science 2019; 7(4): 322-330.
14. Kakar S, Goswami M, Kanase A: Dentin Bonding Agents I: Complete Classification – A Review. World J Dent 2011; 2(4): 367-370.
15. Arandi NZ: The Classification and Selection of Adhesive Agents; an Overview for the General Dentist. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2023; 15: 165-180.
16. Łukomska-Szymańska M, Sokołowski J, Łapińska B: Current views on adhesive bonding systems. J Stomat 2017; 70(4): 384-393.
17. Sadr A, Ghasemi A, Shimada Y, Tagami J: Effects of storage time and temperature on the properties of two self-etching systems. J Dent 2007; 35(3): 218-225.
18. Poptani B, Gohil KS, Ganjiwale J, Shukla M: Microtensile dentin bond strength of fifth with five seventh-generation dentin bonding agents after thermocycling: An in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2012; 3(6): S167-171.
19. Perdigão J: Current perspectives on dental adhesion: (1) Dentin adhesion – not there yet. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 2020; 56(1): 190-207.
20. Szesz A, Parreiras S, Reis A, Loguercio A: Selective enamel etching in cervical lesions for self-etch adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016; 53: 1-11.
21. Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B: Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Dental Materials 2015; 31(3): 308-314.
22. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J et al.: Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: A systematic review of current clinical trials. Dental Materials 2005; 21(9): 864-881.
23. Sofan E, Sofan A, Palaia G et al.: Classification review of dental adhesive systems: from the IV generation to the universal type. Vol. VIII, Annali di Stomatologia. 2017.
24. AL-Ashou WMO, Taher R, Ali AH: Shear-bond strength of different Self-Etching adhesive systems to dentin with or without laser irradiation before photopolymerization (A comparative Study). Saudi Dent J 2022; 34(8): 779-787.
25. Łapińska B, Łukomska-Szymańska MM, Domarecka M: Influence of self-etching adhesive systems on self-adhesive cement-dentin bond strenght. Protet Stomatol 2014; LXIV(3): 186-194.
26. Belli S, Zhang Y, Pereira PNR et al.: Regional Bond Strengths of Adhesive Resins to Pulp Chamber Dentin. J Endod 2001; 27(8): 527-532.
