Journal of Dentistry
Volume 34, Issue 3 , Pages 237-244, March 2006

The effect of the air-blowing step on the technique sensitivity of four different adhesive systems

  • Diego Spreafico

      Affiliations

    • Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, V. Commenda 12, Milan, Italy
  • ,
  • Stefano Semeraro

      Affiliations

    • Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, V. Commenda 12, Milan, Italy
  • ,
  • Dario Mezzanzanica

      Affiliations

    • Department of Restorative and Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, V. Beldiletto 1, Milan, Italy
  • ,
  • Dino Re

      Affiliations

    • Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, V. Commenda 12, Milan, Italy
  • ,
  • Massimo Gagliani

      Affiliations

    • Department of Restorative and Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Milan, V. Beldiletto 1, Milan, Italy
  • ,
  • Toru Tanaka

      Affiliations

    • Department of Oral Health Science, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, North 13 West 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Japan
  • ,
  • Hidehiko Sano

      Affiliations

    • Department of Oral Health Science, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Dental Medicine, North 13 West 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Japan
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +81 11 706 4261; fax: +81 11 706 4878.
  • ,
  • Sharanbir K. Sidhu

      Affiliations

    • Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Sciences, University of Newcastle, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4BW, UK

Received 18 September 2004; received in revised form 5 June 2005; accepted 15 June 2005.

Summary 

Purpose

To evaluate the technique sensitivity of four different adhesive systems using different air-blowing pressure.

Methods

Four adhesive systems were employed: Clearfil SE Bond [SE] (Kuraray, Japan), G-Bond [GB] (GC Corporation, Japan), Adper Prompt L-Pop [LP] (3M ESPE, USA) and an experimental adhesive, SSB-200 [SSB] (Kuraray, Japan). Twenty-four extracted molars were used. After grinding the coronal enamel surface, the teeth were divided into two equal groups. The first group's teeth were randomly assigned for bonding with the different adhesives using gentle air-blowing (g). For the teeth of the second group, the four adhesive systems were applied using strong air-blowing (s). After storage overnight in 37°C water, the bonded specimens were sectioned into sticks (1mm×1mm wide), which were subjected to microtensile bond strength testing (μTBS) at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min. The load at failure of each specimen was recorded and the data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. The surfaces of the fractured specimens were observed using SEM to determine the failure mode.

Results

The results of the μTBS test showed that the highest bond strengths tended to be with SE for both gentle and strong air-blowing, and the significantly lowest for SSB with strong air streaming. Comparing the two techniques, significant differences were noted only for SSB-200 (P<0.05). For each material, the SEM evaluation did not show distinct differences in the nature of the fractures between the two techniques, except for SSB-200.

Conclusions

The adhesives tested are not technique sensitive, except SSB-200, with regards to the air-blowing step.

Keywords: Microtensile bond strength, Adhesion, Self-etching, All-in-one adhesives, Failure mode, Technique sensitivity

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0300-5712(05)00125-9

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2005.06.004

Journal of Dentistry
Volume 34, Issue 3 , Pages 237-244, March 2006