Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

ENAMEL ADHESION OF LIGHT-AND CHEMICAL-CURED COMPOSITES COUPLED BY TWO STEP SELF-ETCH ADHESIVES

2단계 자가 산부식 접착제와 결합된 광중합과 화학중합 복합레진의 법랑질 접착

  • Han, Sae-Hee (Dental Center, Chung Ang University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Eun-Soung (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Cho, Young-Gon (Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • 한세희 (중앙대학교 병원 치과센터 치과보존과) ;
  • 김은성 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 조영곤 (조선대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실)
  • Published : 2007.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was to compare the microshear bond strength $({\mu}SBS)$ of light- and chemically cured composites to enamel coupled with four 2-step self-etch adhesives and also to evaluate the incompatibility between 2-step self-etch adhesives and chemically cured composite resin. Crown segments of extracted human molars were cut mesiodistally, and a 1 mm thickness of specimen was made. They were assigned to four groups by adhesives used: SE group (Clearfil SE Bond) AdheSE group (AdheSE), Tyrian group (Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus), and Contax group (Contax) Each adhesive was applied to a cut enamel surface as per the manufacturer's instruction. Light-cured (Filtek Z250) or chemically cured composite (Luxacore Smartmix Dual) was bonded to the enamel of each specimen using a Tygon tube. After storage in distilled water for 24 hours, the bonded specimens were subjected to ${\mu}SBS$ testing with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/minute. The mean ${\mu}SBS$ (n=20 for each group) was statistically compared using two-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD, and t test at 95% level. Also the interface of enamel and composite was evaluated under FE-SEM. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. The ${\mu}SBS$ of the SE Bond group to the enamel was significantly higher than that of the AdheSE group, the Tyrian group, and the Contax group in both the light-cured and the chemically cured composite resin (p < 0.05). 2. There was not a significant difference among the hdheSE group, the Tyrian group, and the Contax group in both the light-cured and the chemically cured composite resin. 3. The ${\mu}SBS$ of the light-cured composite resin was significantly higher than that of the chemically cured composite resin when same adhesive was applied to the enamel (p < 0.05). 4. The interface of enamel and all 2-step self-etch adhesives showed close adaptation, and so the incompatibility of the chemically cured composite resin did not show.

이 연구의 목적은 2단계 자가산부식 접착제를 이용하여 법랑질에 대한 광중합과 화학중합 복합레진의 결합강도 차이를 비교하고, 또한 현미경적 인 관찰을 통하여 2단계 자가 산부식 접착제가 법랑질에서 화학중합 복합레진과 비적합성을 나타내는가를 알아보기 위해 시행하였다. 미세전단 결합강도를 측정하기 위하여 Isomet Low Speed Saw를 이용하여 발거한 대구치를 근, 원심 방향으로 1 mm두께가 되도록 절단하여 여러 개의 절편을 만들었다. 치아의 절편들을4개의 군으로 분류한 후, 사용된 접착제에 따라 SE Bond 군, AdheSE 군, Tyrian 군 Contax 군으로 분류하였다. 각 군의 접착제를 각 절편의 법랑질 표면에 적용한 후, Tygon tube를 이용하여 광중합형 복합레진 (Filtek Z250) 또는 화학중합 복합레진 (Luxacore Smartmix Dual)을 접착하였다. 실온의 증류수에 24시간 동안 보관한 후, universal testing machine을 이용하여 각 시편의 복합레진과 법랑질의 접착계면이 파절될 때까지 분당 1 mm의 crosshead speed를 가하여 미세전단 결합강도를 측정하였다. 각 군의 미세전단 결합강도치에 대한 유의성 검증은 two-way ANOVA와 Tukey HSD검정 및 독립표본 t 검정을 이용하여 p = 0.05 유의수준에서 분석하였다. 주사전자 현미경 관찰을 위해 발거한 대구치의 협면이나 설면의 법랑질 일부를 Isomet Low Speed Saw로 절단한 후 각 군의 접착제와 광중합 복합레진 또는 화학중합 복합레진을 축조하여 각 군당 2개의 시편을 제작하였다. 주사전자 현미경 하에서 법랑질과 접착제 및 복합레진 계면을 관찰하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 광중합과 화학중합 복합레진 모두에서 SE Bond 군의 법랑질에 대한 미세전단 결합 강도는 다른 3개의 군보다 통계학적으로 높게 나타났다 (p < 0.05). 2. 광중합과 화학중합 복합레진 모두에서 AdheSE 군, Tyrian 군 Contax군의 법랑질에 대한 미세 전단 결합 강도는 통계학적으로 유의한 차이를 나타내지 않았다. 3. 동일한 접착제를 사용한 경우, 모든 군에서 법랑질에 대한 광중합 복합레진의 미세전단 결합강도는 화학중합 복합레진보다 통계학적으로 높게 나타났다 (p < 0.05). 4. 모든 접착제와 법랑질 계면은 긴밀한 접합을 나타내어 화학중합 복합레진과 접착제 간에 비적합성이 나타나지 않았다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bouillaguet S. Gysi P, Wataha JC, Ciucchi B, Cattani M. Godin CH. Meyer JM. Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional. one-step and self-etching adhesive systems, J Dent 29:55-61. 2001 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00049-X
  2. Miyazaki M. Sato M. Onose H. Durability of enamel bond strength of simplified bonding systems. Oper Dent 25:75-80, 2000
  3. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Satoshi I. Vargas M, Yoshida Y. Armstrong S, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Microtensile bond strengths of one- and two-step self-etch adhesives to bur-cut enamel and dentin. Am J Dent 16:414-420, 2003
  4. Miyazaki M. Hinoura K. Honjo G. Onose H. Effect of self-etching primer application method on enamel bond strength. Am J Dent 15:412-416, 2002
  5. Inoue S. Vargas MA. Abe Y. Yoshida Y. Lambrechts P. Vanherle G, Sano H. Van Meerbeek B. Microtensile bond strength of eleven contemporary adhesives to enamel. Am J Dent 16:329-334. 2003
  6. Toledano M. Osorio R. de Leonardi G, Rosales-Leal JI. Ceballos L. Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA. Influence of selfetching primer on the resin adhesion to enamel and dentin. Am J Dent 14:205-210. 2001
  7. Hannig M. Reinhardt KJ, Bott B. Self-etching primer vs phosphoric acid: an alternative concept for compos- ite-to-enamel bonding. Oper Dent 24: 172-180. 1999
  8. Kanemura N. Sano H. Tagami J. Tensile bond strength to and SEM evaluation of ground and intact enamel surfaces. J Dent 27: 523-530. 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00008-1
  9. Watanabe I, Nakabayashi N. Pashley DH. Bonding to ground dentin by a Phenyl-P self-etching dentin primer. J Dent Res 73:1212-1220. 1994 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345940730061301
  10. Hayakawa T, Kikutake K. Nemoto K. Influence of self- etching primer treatment on the adhesion of resin composite to poLished dentin and enamel. Oper Dent 14:99-105, 1998
  11. Kiremitci A. Yalcin F. Gokalp S. Bonding to enamel and dentin using self-etching adhesive systems. Quint Int 35:367-370. 2004
  12. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching systems. I: Depth of penetration beyond dentin smear layers. Dent Mater 17 :296-308, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00087-7
  13. Tay FR, Pashley DH, King NM. Carvalho RM. Tsai J. Lai SCN. Marquezini L. Aggressiveness of self-etch adhesives on unground enamel. Oper Dent 29:309-316. 2004
  14. Frankenberger R. Kramer N, Petschelt A. Long-term effect of dentin primers on enamel bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 25:11-19. 2000
  15. Latta MA, Barkmeier WW, Triolo PT, Cavel WT. Blankenau RJ. One year clinical evaluation of the Clearfil Liner Bond 2 system. J Dent Res 76:162 (Abstract no. 1186). 1997
  16. Kubo S, Yokota H, Sata Y. Hayashi Y. Microleakage of self-etching primers after thermal and flexural load cycling. Am J Dent 14: 163-169, 2001
  17. 조영곤, 조공철. 자가 산부식 프라이머와 자가 산부식 접착제의 변연 미세누출. 대한치과보존학회지 127:493-501, 2005
  18. Sanares AM, Itthagarun A, King NM, Tay FR. Adverse surface interactions between one-bottle light-cured adhesives and chemical-cured composites. Dent Mater 17: 549-556, 2001
  19. Hu X. Marquis PM, Shortall AC. Two-body in vitro wear study of some current dental composites and amalgam. J Prostho Dent 82:214-220, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70159-9
  20. Cheong C, King NM, Pashley DH, Ferrari M, Toledano M. Tay FR. Incompatibility of self-etch adhesives with chemical/dual-cured composites: two-step vs one-step systems. Oper Dent 28:747-755. 2003
  21. Tay FR. Pashley DH, Peters MC. Adhesive permeability affects composite coupling to dentin treated with a self-etch adhesive. Oper Dent 28:610-621, 2003
  22. Tay FR. Pashley DH, Suh BI. Carvalho RM. Miller MB. Single-step self-etch adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. Part I. Bond strength and morphologic evidence. Am J Dent 17:271-278, 2004
  23. Tay FR. Pashley DH. Yiu CK. Sanares,AM, Wei SH. Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and chemically-cured or dual-cured composites. Part I. Single-bottle self-etching adhesive. J Adhes Dent 5:27-40. 2003
  24. Tay FR. Suh BI. Pashley DH, Prati C. Chuang SF, Li F. Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and self-cured or dual-cured composites. Part II. Single-bottle, total-etch adhesive. J Adhes Dent 5:91-105, 2003
  25. Yoshiyama M, Sano H, Ebisu S. Tagami J, Ciucchi B. Cavalho RM, Johnson MH, Pashley DH. Regional strengths of bonding agents to cervical sclerotic dentin. J Dent Res 75:1404-1413, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345960750061201
  26. Sano H. Shono T. Sonoda H. Takatsu T. Ciucchi B, Carvalho RM. Pashley DH. Relationship between surface area for adhesion and tensile bond strength-evaluation of a microtensile bond test. Dent Mater 10: 236-240, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(94)90067-1
  27. 조영곤, 김종진. 법랑소주 방햐에 따른 접착제의 미세전단 결합 강도. 대한치과보존학회지 30:344-351, 2005
  28. Cheong C, King NM, Pashley DH, Ferrari M, Toledano M, Tay FR. Incompatibility of self-etch adhesives with chemical/dual-cured composites: two-step vs one-step systems. Oper Dent 28:747-755, 2003
  29. Yamauchi J. Study of dental adhesive containing phophoric acid methacrylate monomer. Jap J Dent Mater 5: 144-154. 1986
  30. Lopes GC. Marson FC. Vieira LCC. de Andrada MAC, Baratieri LN. Composite bond strength to enamel with self-etching primers. Oper Dent 29:424-429. 2004
  31. Yamada T. Sugizaki J. Basic properties and clinical application of the Clearfil SE Bond. Preceeding of the International Kuraray Symposium. Osaka, p1-6. 2000
  32. Perdigao J, Lopes L. Lambrechts P, Leitao J. Van Meerbeek B. Effects of a self-etching primer on enamel shear bond strengths and SEM morphology. Am J Dent 10:141-146, 1997
  33. Reifeis PE, Cochran MA, Moore BK. An in vitro shear bond strength study of enamel/dentin bonding systems on enamel. Oper Dent 20:174-179,1995
  34. Swift EJ Jr, Perdigao J, Heymann HO, Ritter AV. Shear bond strength of one-bottle adhesives to moist enamel. J Adhes Dent 11: 103-107, 1999

Cited by

  1. Effect of pre-heating on some physical properties of composite resin vol.34, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2009.34.1.030