Abstract
The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of six commercially available universal dental adhesives: Adhese Universal (ADU), All-Bond Universal (ABU), Clearfil Universal Bond Quick (CBQ), G-Premio Bond (GPB), Prelude One (PRO) and Scotchbond Universal (SBU). The properties tested were: (a) degree of C=C conversion (DC%); (b) Vickers micro-hardness (VHN); (c) extent of oxygen inhibition (OI/μm), all related with the adhesive film properties; (d) extent of dentin demineralisation (DM%), insoluble salt formation (AS%); and (e) shear bond strength (SBS, self-etch mode) related to the adhesive-dentin interactions. Statistical analysis (α = 0.05) was performed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (DC%, VHN, OI, DM% AS%) and Weibull analysis (SBS, σ0-β). The DC ranged from 67.2–82.5% (all >GPB), OI from 5.6–18.6 μm (SBU > ADU, GPB, ABU > CBQ > PRO), microhardness from 1.1–6.6 VHN (SBU > ADU > ABU > CBQ > PRO > GPB: not measurable), DM from 69.3% (GPB) to 16–12.5% (CBQ, SBU, ADU) and 13.2–10.6% (ABU, ADU, PRO), in homogeneous groups and AS from 26–15.9% (ABU, CBQ > GPB, PRO, ADU, SBU). For SBS the σ0 (characteristic life) ranged from 29.3–16.6 MPa (CBQ, ADU, ABU, SBU > PRO > GPB), the β (reliability) from 5.1–9.7 (p > 0.05). All failure modes were of mixed type (adhesive and composite cohesive). Although all these adhesives were based on the 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (10-MDP) adhesive monomer, the different co-monomers, solvents and catalysts led to variations in their film properties, reactivity and bonding capacity with dentin.
Highlights
Despite significant improvements in adhesive systems, the bonded interface of dental hard tissues with resinous restoratives and luting agents remains the weakest area of tooth-coloured restorations [1,2]
The central part of each specimen was slightly pressed against a class III diamond reflective element (1 × 1 mm2 ) of an attenuated total reflectance (ATR) cell (Golden Gate, Specac, Orpington, UK) with ZnSe focusing lenses, which was attached to a Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer (Spectrum GX, Perkin-Elmer, Buckinghamshire, UK)
Based on the resultswere obtained the present study, the null hypothesis has to be rejected, since significant differences foundin between the materials tested in various properties
Summary
Despite significant improvements in adhesive systems, the bonded interface of dental hard tissues with resinous restoratives and luting agents remains the weakest area of tooth-coloured restorations [1,2]. Philosophy [3], can be used as self-etch, etch-and-rinse or enamel selective-etch agents for bonding direct and indirect restorations to enamel and dentin [4,5]. Since the acidic monomers of these adhesives have already been introduced as primers for other substrates (i.e., alloys, polycrystalline ceramics), a multi-mode treatment has been instructed for these products. The universal adhesives contain monomer blends of mild to moderate acidity (phosphate, carboxylic etc.) in reduced concentrations compared with their precursors [6], conventional dimethacrylate cross-linkers, non-acidic emulsifying monomers, catalysts for light- or dual-curing and a proper selection of solvents to enhance monomer spreading and substrate infiltration capacity.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
