Warm Air Delivery in Adhesive Application: Effect on Bonding Performance and Morphological Outcomes.

Solvent evaporation within an adhesive layer is a crucial step during a bonding process. The aim of this current research was to test whether the use of different air temperatures (20 °C, 40 °C, and 60 °C) for solvent evaporation improves the performance of four adhesive systems to dentin. Sixty non-carious human molar teeth were randomly prepared for micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) tests. Four different adhesive systems, Prime&Bond Universal (PBU), OptiBond Universal (OBU), OptiBond FL (OBFL), and Clearfil SE (CSE), were applied following the manufacturer's instructions. Three groups based on the air-drying temperature were used: solvent evaporation was performed with either of warm (40 °C), (60 °C), and cold air as control group (20 °C) for 10 s at a distance of 5 cm. In all bonded surfaces, three resin composite (Reflectys, Itena Clinical, Paris, France) layers of 2 mm thickness were built up. The resin-dentin samples were kept in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and 6 months, respectively, before µTBS testing. Failure analysis, scanning electron microscopy of resin-dentin bonded interface, and solvent evaporation rate were tested as secondary variables. All analyses were conducted using a significance level of α = 0.05. Bond strength (BS) values were similar among all the adhesive systems used (p > 0.05). Also, the aging factor did not affect the BS (p > 0.05). Only the factor of temperature used for solvent evaporation resulted in a statistically significant effect (p < 0.05), with the temperature of 60 °C being the highest value (p < 0.05). A failure mode evaluation revealed mostly adhesive or mixed modes of failures in all the different temperatures of air used for the solvent evaporation of each adhesive system. The thickness of the adhesive layer and the creation of resin tags varied amongst the temperatures evaluated. For all adhesive systems tested, the use of 40 °C or 60 °C air for solvent evaporation led to an increased mass loss. Warmer temperatures for solvent evaporation contributed positively to bonding performance, enhancing both the quality of the adhesive layer and its interaction with the dentin tissue. Optimizing solvent evaporation with warmer air temperatures (40 °C and 60 °C) significantly improved µTBS, offering a practical means to enhance the quality and longevity of adhesive restorations in esthetic dentistry.

Effectiveness of Different Application Modalities on the Bond Performance of Four Polymeric Adhesive Systems to Dentin.

One of the major goals of adhesive dentistry is to improve the interaction of the already-existing adhesives with different substrates by using different application techniques. Thus, the objective of the present in vitro study was to assess the bond performance of four adhesive systems, Prime&Bond Universal (PBU), Clearfil SE Bond (CSE), OptiBond Universal (OBU), and OptiBond FL (OBFL), to dentin using various application modes: passive application (PA), active application (AA), Compo-Vibes modified application (CVM), and Compo-Vibes application (CV). Eighty extracted human molars were allocated into four groups based on the application modalities tested. The micro-tensile bond strength as well as fracture mode were tested in accordance with ISO/TS 11.405 after 24 h and 6 months of aging. Adhesive contact angle (CA) and scanning electron microscope analysis were also performed (n = 3). Statistical tests were performed with α = 0.05. After 24 h, a significant difference with a higher bond strength value was found for PBU in the AA modality and for CSE in the CVM modality (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was shown between the techniques used among the other adhesives (OBFL and OBU). Moreover, at 24 h, only the PA demonstrated significant differences between the tested materials (p < 0.05). After 6 months, CSE, PBU, and OBU demonstrated significant differences between the techniques (p < 0.05), with a higher bond strength for CSE in AA and CVM modalities, for PBU in AA modality, and for OBU in AA and PA modalities. No significant differences were found between the techniques used among the OBFL (p > 0.05). In addition, only the CVM technique demonstrated significant differences between the tested materials after 6 months. CV and CVM showed a decreased value after aging for CSE and PBU, respectively. However, all the modalities decreased for OBU and OBFL after aging. All the adhesives showed marked resin infiltration into dentinal tubules in AA among all the modalities tested. Both universal adhesive systems (OBU and PBU) demonstrated statistically lower CA when compared to the other systems (CSE and OBFL) (p < 0.05) when applied in the PA mode. Concerning the AA mode, only CSE and OBFL were tested. The AA demonstrated lower CA values compared to the same adhesives in PA (p < 0.05). It could be concluded that the bond strength could be influenced by both materials and application techniques. It seems that the AA technique could be recommended as a gold standard for the application of an adhesive system to dentin. Plus, the CV and CVM modalities after 6 months of aging were considered stable for PBU and CSE, respectively. Consequently, the performance of these adhesive systems might vary when applied to other modalities. Future studies are needed to test this hypothesis.

Effect of contamination and decontamination methods on the bond strength of adhesive systems to dentin: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: In a suitable condition, it is important to perform any dental restorative procedure using an operatory field isolated. Then, the aim of this study was to compare the bond strength of composite restorations to dentin affected by any contamination agent through a systematic review. METHODS: This systematic review was performed following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. The literature search was conducted until September 2022 by scanning the following databases: Embase, PubMed, Scielo, Scopus, and Web of Science. Manuscripts evaluated the bond strength of resin-based materials to permanent human dentin contaminated with blood or saliva were selected for full-text review. The risk of bias was assessed by the RoBDEMAT tool. RESULTS: A total of 3750 papers resulted from the search from all databases. After the full-text reading, a total of 62 articles remained for the qualitative analysis. The contamination agents used were blood, saliva, and hemostatic agents. A great variety of protocols were used to contaminate the dentin surface, and the contamination process occurred in several steps of the bonding process, including before and after the etching process, after the primer application and after the adhesive application. Also, several decontamination procedures were tested, including reapplication of the etching material, rinsing with water, chlorhexidine or sodium hypochlorite and reapplication of the adhesive system. CONCLUSION: Any contamination with blood or saliva impaired the bond strength of resin-based materials to dentin. Decontamination procedures including water-spray and reapplication of the bonding system could revert the impairment produced by the saliva or blood contamination. The use of hemostatic agents as a method of blood decontamination is not recommended. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians should avoid contamination during a bonding procedure, otherwise, a reduction in the bond quality is expected.

Clinical Evaluation of Microhybrid Composite and Glass lonomer Restorative Material in Permanent Teeth.

AIM: The aim of this study was to clinically compare glass ionomer cement (GIC) with microhybrid composite resin used in class I cavities on permanent teeth over a period of 9 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 teeth with class I cavities were divided into two groups (n = 20) and restored with GIC (EQUIA; GC) and microhybrid resin composite (Amelogen Plus; Ultradent). Restorations were evaluated at ×4.5 magnification using the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria every 3 months. Statistical analysis was performed using the Fisher's exact test (a < 0.05). RESULTS: The data obtained reported no statistical significance difference between both groups in regard to anatomical shape, color, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, material handling, adaptation, and marginal staining. CONCLUSION: The results of this clinical study showed that GIC (EQUIA; GC) can be used for the restoration of permanent teeth and may be more appropriate for certain clinical situations than the resin composite material. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: EQUIA (GIC) is a viable alternative to resin composite in restoring class I cavities in permanent teeth.