PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11725660

Practitioner variability effects on dentin bonding with an acetone-based one-bottle adhesive.

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of operator variability on the marginal performance of resin composite restorations bonded with an acetone-base one-bottle adhesive in standardized dentin preparations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five general practitioners were recruited for this trial. In the first group, each dentist received six extracted human teeth with dentin preparations (Ø 3.5 mm, 1.5 mm deep), cut in flatground proximal dentin, and original packages of Gluma One Bond adhesive and Charisma resin composite (Heraeus-Kulzer, Werheim, Germany) including instructions for use. For the second group, the operators were orally instructed, emphasizing the importance of the moist technique, before they received another six teeth for restoration with the same materials. Finally, a third group of six preparations was restored in order to evaluate a possible training effect. The restored teeth were stored in a hygrophor prior to removal of excess material and microscopic determination of the maximum marginal gap width (MGW). Statistical analyses were performed with the Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Apart from two samples, preparation margins in the first test group showed gaps between 1 and 12 microns. In the second and third groups, 15 and 16 restorations were gap free, respectively. Significant interoperator variation was found in the first group only. Marginal performance of group 1 restorations was significantly inferior to groups 2 and 3, which were not different (p = 0.79). CONCLUSION: Application of the one-bottle adhesive is technique-sensitive and requires meticulous attention to the instructions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W J Finger, M Balkenhol. 1999. Practitioner variability effects on dentin bonding with an acetone-based one-bottle adhesive.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11725660/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Healing substrates with mobile, particle-filled microcapsules: designing a 'repair and go' system.

We model the rolling motion of a fluid-driven, particle-filled microcapsule along a heterogeneous, adhesive substrate to determine how the release of the encapsulated nanoparticles can be harnessed to repair damage on the underlying surface. We integrate the lattice Boltzmann model for hydrodynamics and the lattice spring model for the micromechanics of elastic solids to capture the interactions between the elastic shell of the microcapsule and the surrounding fluids. A Brownian dynamics model is used to simulate the release of nanoparticles from the capsule and their diffusion into the surrounding solution. We focus on a substrate that contains a damaged region (e.g. a crack or eroded surface coating), which prevents the otherwise mobile capsule from rolling along the surface. We isolate conditions where nanoparticles released from the arrested capsule can repair the damage and thereby enable the capsules to again move along the substrate. Through these studies, we establish guidelines for designing particle-filled microcapsules that perform a 'repair and go' function and thus, can be utilized to repair damage in microchannels and microfluidic devices.

Adhesives↗

Bonding to ground versus unground enamel in fluorosed teeth.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of grinding on the bonding effectiveness of a self-etch and an etch-and-rinse adhesive to fluorosed enamel. METHODS: The teeth were classified using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov index (TFI). Fluorosed teeth (TFI=5) obtained from Isparta (Turkey) and control teeth (TFI=0) obtained from Leuven (Belgium) were used. Using a depth-marking diamond bur, 0.3mm of enamel was removed from mid-buccal and mid-palatal/lingual surfaces of the teeth, whereas the area adjacent to the ground area was left unprepared. A two-step self-etch (Clearfil Protect Bond, Kuraray) and a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Optibond FL, Kerr) were used to bond the resin composite to the ground and unground enamel. Rectangular micro-specimens were prepared using the slow-speed diamond saw and tested in tensile to determine the micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS). RESULTS: The microTBS to unground fluorosed enamel was significantly lower than to ground fluorosed enamel for Clearfil Protect Bond (15.8+/-15.2 and 45.0+/-12.4MPa, p<0.0001) and for Optibond FL (35.5+/-21.4 and 50.5+/-12.3MPa, p<0.05), respectively. In control teeth, Clearfil Protect Bond bonded better to ground enamel (p<0.01), whereas OptiBond FL exhibited a similar bonding effectiveness to ground and unground enamel (p=0.0634). SIGNIFICANCE: Preparation of enamel improved the resin-enamel bond strength in fluorosed teeth. The bonding effectiveness to unground enamel was lower in fluorosed teeth than in control teeth for the self-etch adhesive tested.

Adhesives↗