Anda di halaman 1dari 8

The shear bond strength of self-adhesive

resin cements to dentin and enamel: An


in vitro study
Raphaela F. Rodrigues, MSc, PhD,a Carla M. Ramos, MSc, PhD,b
Paulo A. S. Francisconi, DDS, MSc, PhD,c and
Ana Flávia. S. Borges, DDS, MSc, PhDd
Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru,
São Paulo, Brazil
Statement of problem. Clinicians continue to search for ways to simplify bonding procedures without compromising clinical
efficacy.

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear strength of self-adhesive cements RelyX U100 and RelyX U200,
and conventional resin cement RelyX ARC to enamel and dentin after different surface treatments.

Material and methods. The crowns of 120 bovine incisor teeth were separated from the roots and embedded in epoxy resin in
polyvinyl chloride tubes. In each tooth, the area to be cemented was delimited with central holed adhesive tape. The teeth
were distributed into 12 groups (n¼10) according to the substrate; etched or not with 37% phosphoric acid; and cement type
of enamel-U100, enamel-phosphoric acid-U100, enamel-U200, enamel-phosphoric acid-U200, enamel-ARC, enamel-
phosphoric acid-ARC, dentin-U100, dentin-phosphoric acid-U100, dentin-U200, dentin-phosphoric acid-U200, dentin-ARC,
and dentin-phosphoric acid-ARC. After 7 days of storage in artificial saliva, shear strength tests were performed by using a
universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). The data were analyzed with 3-way ANOVA and the Tukey test (a¼.05). Fracture
analysis was performed with a light microscope. Two specimens from each group were analyzed with a scanning electron
microscope.

Results. In enamel, ARC (9.96 MPa) had higher shear strength (P¼.038) than U100 (5.14 MPa); however, after surface
etching, U100 (17.81 MPa) and U200 (17.52 MPa) had higher shear strength (P<.001). With dentin, no significant dif-
ferences were observed (P¼.999), except for dentin-ARC (0.34 MPa) (P¼.001). Most fractures were of the adhesive type.

Conclusions. U200 self-adhesive cement had similar bond strength to the ARC in enamel, but the combination with
phosphoric acid had the best bond strength. For dentin, self-adhesive resin cements are equally effective alternatives to
conventional resin cement. (J Prosthet Dent 2014;-:---)

Clinical Implications
The dental profession has been searching to simplify bonding procedures
without compromising clinical efficacy, and self-adhesive resin cements
can be a practical alternative to conventional resin cements in tooth
restoration procedures.

The clinical success of indirect restorations on the teeth.1-4 Dental ce- dental surface and seal tooth margins.
restorative procedures depends partly ments promote the required retention Resin cements are the most used ma-
on the cement used to bond indirect of indirect restorations to the remaining terials for the cementation of indirect

This study was supported by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel and the National Council for
Scientific and Technological Development.
a
Graduate student, Department of Dentistry, Endodontic and Dental Materials.
b
Graduate student, Department of Dentistry, Endodontic and Dental Materials.
c
Associate Professor, Department of Dentistry, Endodontic and Dental Materials.
d
Professor, Department of Dentistry, Endodontic and Dental Materials.

Rodrigues et al
2 Volume - Issue -

restorations.5,6 Self-adhesive resin cements dentin, self-adhesive cements produce a its adhesion in enamel is still a concern.22
can provide a single-step cementation superficial interface without demineraliz- However, the adhesion effectiveness of
technique2,7-10 because the dental sub- ing the smear layer or forming a hybrid newly launched and improved self-
strate does not need to be etched or layer.21,24 Even total etching determines adhesive cements has not been fully
have an adhesive applied.1,2,11-14 Self- other patterns of demineralization and investigated in either enamel or dentin.
adhesive resin cements eliminate the dissolution of minerals, which allows This in vitro study aims to evaluate the
chemical incompatibility observed when micromechanical interlocking and/or bond strength of self-adhesive resin ce-
simplified adhesive systems are used entrapment of the resin with the tissue ments to bovine enamel and dentin, with
with chemical or dual-polymerized resin substrate.26-29 In spite of the superficial and without phosphoric acid etching.
cements.15 Furthermore, self-adhesives interface, a chemical interaction seems The null hypotheses tested were that the
tolerate moisture and fluoride release, to occur between the monomers of self- resin cements would not exhibit different
and do not trigger postoperative sen- adhesive resin cements and the calcium bond strengths in enamel and dentin or
sitivity.1,16,17 The combination of tech- hydroxyapatite; this interaction provides with and without prior phosphoric acid
nical simplification and lower patient micromechanical retention.1,20,23 etching.
sensitivity provided by self-adhesive resin Detailed information about the
cements has attracted considerable in- composition and adhesive properties of MATERIAL AND METHODS
terest from manufacturers and clini- self-adhesive cements is still limited.
cians.2,18-20 Different results have been reported The composition, batch, and man-
The demineralization pattern for for the bond strength of self-adhesive ufacturer of the materials are listed in
both enamel and dentin, however, is and conventional resin cements in Table I. One hundred and twenty
different from that of resin cements that enamel and dentin, with or without bovine incisor teeth were selected,
require acid etching. In enamel, the prior etching of the tooth surfaces. Most cleaned, and stored in 0.1% thymol
demineralization pattern is based on reports indicate that self-adhesive ce- supersaturated solution at 4 C before
multifunctional monomers with phos- ments produce a lower bond strength in preparation. The first step was to sec-
phoric acid groups simultaneously enamel and in dentin than conventional tion the roots from the crowns with
demineralizing and infiltrating the resin cement, even though manufac- a cutting machine (Isomet 1000TM;
enamel.1,21-24 By contrast, a porous turers’ instructions indicate no acid Buehler). Each crown was embedded in
surface, which can be infiltrated by re- etching.5,11,18,21,30-35 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) cylinders (15.0
sin, must be acid etched to enable a Although self-adhesive cements pro- mm in height and 25.0 mm in diam-
strong micromechanical bond.25 In vide reasonable adhesion to dentin,3,35,36 eter) with epoxy resin (MX-6921;

Table I. Composition, batch number, and manufacturer of materials used


Material Composition Batch No. Manufacturer

RelyX U100 Base paste: fiberglass, phosphoric acid esters methacrylate, triethylene 459579 3M ESPE
glycol dimethacrylate, silica treated silane, and sodium persulfate;
catalyst paste: fiberglass, substitute dimethacrylate, silane treated
silica, p-toluenesulfonate sodium, and calcium hydroxide

RelyX U200 Base paste: glass powder treated with silane, 2-propenoic acid, 481248 3M ESPE
2-methyl 1,10 -(1-[hydroxymetil]-1,2-ethanodlyl) ester
dimethacrylate, triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA),
silica treated silane, glass fiber, sodium persulfate and per-3,5,5-
trimethyl hexanoate t-butyl; catalyst paste: glass powder treated
with silane, substitute dimethacrylate, silica-treated silane, sodium
p-toluenesulfonate, 1-benzyl-5-phenyl-acid barium, calcium, 1,12-
dodecane dimethacrylate, calcium hydroxide, and
titanium dioxide

RelyX ARC Paste A: bisphenol-A-glycidyl dimethacrylate (BisGMA), TEGDMA, N331951 3M ESPE


zirconia silica, pigments, amines and photoinitiator system; paste
B: BisGMA, TEGDMA, zirconia silica, benzoyl peroxide

Phosphoric acid Phosphoric acid 37%, colloidal silica, surfactant, and colorant 525532D Dentsply Intl

Adper Scotchbond Primer 2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylate and polyalkenoic acid N239896 3M ESPE

Adper Scotchbond Adhesive Bismethacrylate (1-methylethylidene) bis (4,1-phenylenoxy N251381 3M ESPE


[2-hydroxy-3,1-propanediyl]) and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Rodrigues et al


- 2014 3
thereafter. The ground dentin surfaces
SUBSTRATE CEMENTS SURFACE GROUPS
TREATMENT
were observed under a stereomicro-
scope (Plus AM-313T; Dino-Lite) at
..... 25 magnification to verify complete
E-U100
enamel removal.
RelyX U100
Phosphoric acid (P) E-P-U100 All the crowns were cleaned with
pumice (Pumice; Maquira) and water.
..... E-U200 To standardize the bonding area of all
Enamel (E) RelyX U200 the specimens, a central holed adhesive
Phosphoric acid (P) E-P-U200 tape, 3.0 mm in diameter was placed
on the surface of the enamel and the
Adhesive E-ARC dentin. Before cementing, the crowns
RelyX ARC received surface treatment in the
Phosphoric acid (P) + bonding areas, according to the
E-P-ARC
adhesive
substrate, group, and manufacturer’s
instructions (Fig. 1). The enamel-ARC
..... D-U100 and dentin-ARC groups were con-
RelyX U100 sidered negative controls, whereas
Phosphoric acid (P) D-P-U100
the enamel-phosphoric acid-ARC and
the dentin-phosphoric acid-ARC were
..... D-U200 positive controls.
Dentin (D) RelyX U200
Phosphoric acid (P) D-P-U200 The crowns were secured in a metal
device (Fig. 2) for the cement applica-
tion and were mounted inside a split
Primer + Adhesive D-ARC
polytetrafluoroethene mold (Teflon;
RelyX ARC
Phosphoric acid (P) + Dupont) mold (Fig. 2) with a central
D-P-ARC
primer + adhesive orifice (3.0 mm in diameter and 2.0
1 Experimental groups according to substrate, cement, and surface treatment. mm in height). The cements were
inserted into the Teflon mold, and
standardized pressure was applied by
Basis for coupling Teflon mold using the largest Gilmore needle (454
g). Photoactivation was performed
Teflon mold
with a light emitting diode (Optilight
Screw to secure the Teflon mold LD Max; Gnatus) with a power density
PVC + tooth of 500 mW/cm2, which was verified
before use with a radiometer. The time
Cement for cement mixing, photoactivation,
3.0 mm
and setting was according to the man-
ufacturers’ instructions. For the U100,
the mixture time was 20 seconds plus
Screw to secure the PVC 20 seconds of photactivation and 5
2.0 mm
PVC + tooth minutes of setting. For the U200, the
mixture time was 20 seconds plus 20
Metallic device Teflon mold Specimen seconds of photactivation and 6 mi-
2 Schematic representation of metal device to clamp nutes of setting. For the ARC, the
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) cylinder plus tooth and Teflon mold mixture time was 10 seconds plus 40
to cementation; Teflon mold with central orifice (diameter, seconds of photactivation and 10 mi-
3.0 mm; height, 2.0 mm) and specimen after cementation. nutes of setting. The cement and ad-
hesive tape excesses were removed with
Redelease). The buccal surfaces of the grit silicon carbide paper (Sandpaper; a scalpel blade.
crowns were ground in a water-cooled Extec) were used; each grit was used for The specimens (Fig. 2) were stored
mechanical grinder and polisher (ER- 5 minutes. To expose the dentin, 120- for 7 days at 37 C in artificial saliva
27000; Erios) at a speed of 300 rpm to grit abrasive paper was used until with an electrolyte composition similar
expose the flat enamel or dentin. To initial exposure, and 320-grit and 600- to that of human saliva. The artificial
expose the enamel, 320-grit and 600- grit abrasive papers were used saliva consisted of a 0.02 M Tris buffer,
Rodrigues et al
4 Volume - Issue -

e e
results of the 3-way ANOVA of SBS
18 17.81 17.52 Enamel data are listed in Table II. Results of
Dentin statistical analysis indicated that the
Shear Bond Strength (MPa)

16
type of substrate, type of resin cement,
14 and phosphoric acid etching affected
12 the bond strength values (P<.001). A
e
9.96 significant substrate and treatment in-
10 teraction occurred (P<.001), and the
a,c a,c
8 7.34 phosphoric acid etching increased the
a,b a,b,c a,b,c 6.74
5.47 a,b,d a,b,d SBS values, except for the U100
6 5.14 5.29 4.62 4.85 (P¼.998) and the U200 (P>.05) ce-
4 b,d ments in dentin. In enamel, the
2 1.64 d self-adhesive cements had similar
0.34 SBS values when compared with each
0
other (P>.05). When comparing
0

00

00

00

RC

RC
0

10

10

20

20
AR

AR

enamel-U100 (5.14 1.15 MPa),


U1

U1

U2

U2

-A

-A
-U

-U

-U

-U
E-

P-

-P
E-

P-

E-

P-

-P

-P
E-

enamel-U200 (5.29 1.20 MPa), and

D
E-

E-

D
Group
enamel-phosphoric acid-ARC (9.96
3 Mean of shear bond strength values (MPa) of different resin cements for 3.79 MPa), all the groups were used
enamel and dentin, with and without acid etching; means with different letters are as recommended by the manufacturers,
significantly different (P<.05).
and similar SBS values (mean SD)
were observed between ARC and U200
Table II. Three-way ANOVA (P<.05) (P¼.052), but the U100 had lower SBS
Source of Sum of Mean values compared with ARC (P¼.038).
Variation df Squares Squares F P When phosphoric acid etching was
applied to the enamel before placement
S 1 653.007 653.007 66.180 <.001 of the self-adhesive resin cements
C 1 358.420 179.210 18.162 <.001 (enamel-phosphoric acid-U100: 17.81
4.08 MPa and enamel-phosphoric
T 2 1451.509 1451.509 147.105 <.001
acid -U200: 17.52 7.37 MPa) higher
S3C 2 118.153 59.077 5.987 .003
SBS values were observed for the con-
S3T 1 509.356 509.356 51.621 <.001 ventional resin cement (enamel-phos-
C3T 2 10.165 5.083 0.515 .060 phoric acid-ARC: 9.96 3.79 MPa)
S3C3T 2 179.932 89.966 9.118 <.001 (P<.001).
No difference (P>.05) was observed
S, substrate; C, cement; T, treatment.
in dentin between RelyX U100, RelyX
U200, and RelyX ARC, with or without
pH 7.0, which contained 1.5 mM cal- cohesive in enamel, cohesive in dentin, phosphoric acid etching before the
cium nitrate, 0.9 mM dibasic sodium cohesive in cement, or mixed. Two application of the cements, except for
phosphate dehydrate, 0.15 M potas- specimens from each group were the dentin-ARC negative control group
sium chloride, and 0.05 ppm sodium selected for scanning electron micro- (0.34 0.48 MPa) (P¼.001). The ma-
fluoride. scope (SEM) analysis in a scanning jority of fractures (68.3%) produced
Shear bond strength (SBS) tests electron microscope (JSM-T220A; Jeol) during the SBS tests were of the adhe-
were performed in a universal testing with 1000 magnification. The speci- sive mode (Fig. 4). Results of the
machine (0.5 mm/min) (Emic DL 500 mens were attached to metal stubs, SEM analysis indicates minimal micro-
DF; LTDA) with a cell load of 50 kg. vacuum dried, and sputter coated with mechanical retention between the
The shear load was applied through a gold (Desk IY; Denton Vacuum). The self-adhesive cements and enamel
steel wire around the cement cylinder data were analyzed with 3-way ANOVA (Figs. 5A, B, and 6A, B). As indicated in
and the tooth surface. The SBS values followed by the post hoc Tukey test Figure 7A (enamel-phosphoric acid-
were recorded in newtons (N) and (a¼.05). ARC), micromechanical retention is
converted into megapascals (MPa). more evident between the conventional
Fracture analysis was performed on all RESULTS resin cement and enamel in relation
specimens with a portable digital mi- to Figures 5A, B, and Figures 6A, B. The
croscope (Plus AM-313T; Dino-Lite). The median SBS values of the tested photomicrographs of dentinal surfaces
Fractures were classified as adhesive, resin cements are listed in Figure 3. The show structures that are suggestive of a
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Rodrigues et al
- 2014 5

100% hydroxyapatite to form a stable bond


between the methacrylate network and
90% the tooth.21-24 Sodium, calcium, fluo-
ride, and silicate ions that are released
80%
by alkaline particles neutralize the
70% remaining acid groups,1,22 and the
presence of calcium hydroxide seems to
60% accelerate the neutralization.22 Both
Fractures

self-adhesive cements tested in this


50%
study have calcium hydroxide in their
40% composition.
Although not recommended by the
30% manufacturer, phosphoric acid etching
improved the SBS values (P<.001) of
20% self-adhesive resin cements in enamel.
10%
The findings can be explained by
the increased microscopic irregularities
0% produced by the use of 37% phosphoric
00

00

00

00

RC

RC

S
acid21 and the pressure used. However,

UP
10

10

20

20
AR

AR
U1

U1

U2

U2

-A

-A
-U

-U

-U

-U

O
E-

P-

according to Goracci et al,32 the pressure


D

-P
E-

P-

E-

P-

GR
D

-P

-P
E-

D
E-

E-

L
contributes to a reduction in the thick-

AL
Group
ness and porosity of the cement, and
Mixed Cohesive in cement Cohesive in dentin improves adaptation to the cavity
Cohesive in enamel Adhesive walls21 but does not influence the bond
strength to the enamel.32 Similar results
4 Fracture modes of tested cements.
also were reported by Duarte et al,5
and other investigators observed
bond strength in self-adhesive cements
smear layer combined with cements, the SBS values between enamel- similar to that of conventional resin ce-
which partially covered the dentin sur- phosphoric acid-U100 and enamel- ments33 after phosphoric acid etching.
face, and indicated micromechanical phosphoric acid-U200 in enamel. The Results of the SEM analysis indi-
retention between the cement and bond strength values observed for cated more micromechanical retention
dentin (Figs. 5C and 6C). More me- the enamel were similar between the between the enamel and cement in the
chanical interaction (smear layer com- self-adhesive cements (RelyX U100 and enamel-phosphoric acid-ARC group
bined with cements) between the RelyX U200) (P>.05). The same trend than in the other enamel groups. These
cement and dentin are shown in reported in the literature that conven- findings are contradictory, because
Figures 5D, 6D, and 7B, which suggests tional resin cements present higher they show increased bond strength in
that the self-adhesive cement deminer- bond strength to enamel compared with the enamel-phosphoric acid-U100 and
alized and penetrated the dentinal tu- self-adhesive resin cements5,21,30,33,35 enamel-phosphoric acid-U200 groups
bules, similar to what is observed with was found between ARC (enamel- when compared with the enamel-
conventional resin cement. phosphoric acid-ARC, 9.96 3.79 phosphoric acid-ARC group. In dentin,
MPa, positive control group) and U100 the self-adhesive cements show similar
DISCUSSION (enamel-U100, 5.14 1.15 MPa) ce- bond strength to conventional resin
ments (P¼.038). However, RelyX U200 cement in the dentin (P>.05), which
This study investigated the SBS val- (enamel-U200: 5.29 1.20 MPa) had corroborates the results from several
ues of self-adhesive (U100 and U200) similar bond strength results to those studies,6,21,30,32,33,35,36 except for the
and conventional (ARC) resin cements of RelyX ARC (enamel- phosphoric acid- dentin-ARC negative control group
to bovine enamel and dentin with ARC, 9.96 3.79 MPa) (P¼.052), (0.34 0.48 MPa) (P¼.001). However,
and without prior phosphoric acid perhaps because of the additional there is literature that indicates that
etching. The SBS results found that the monomer, new rheology, and optimi- results are variable and dependent on
null hypotheses of the study were rejec- zation of the filler particle process- the cement used compared with con-
ted because significant differences in ing according to the manufacturer. ventional resin cements.6,7,22,31
bond strength values were observed Furthermore, self-adhesive cements in- In contrast, no improvement in SBS
between U100 and ARC in enamel, itially have a low pH,11 and the acid values (P>.05) was observed when
and phosphoric acid etching improved groups connect with calcium phosphoric acid etching was used on
Rodrigues et al
6 Volume - Issue -

5 Scanning electron microscope image (1000 magnification) of specimens with U100 self-adhesive resin cement in
enamel and dentin after shear bond strength test. A, Group enamel-U100; note that micromechanical retention is not
evident. B, Group enamel-phosphoric acid-U100; note that, in spite of prior acid etching, it is not possible to see micro-
mechanical retention. C, Group dentin-U100, mechanical interaction between cement and dentin was not observed. D,
Group dentin-phosphoric acid-U100; note that acid etching increased micromechanical retention between cement and
dentinal tubules.

the dentin surface, and these results do treatment (dentin-phosphoric acid- spectroscopy radiograph analysis of the
not corroborate the findings of De U100, dentin-phosphoric acid-U200, relevant chemical interaction with cal-
Munck et al21 and Hikita et al,33 who and the dentin-phosphoric acid-ARC); cium hydroxyapatite indicate that this
claimed that prior conditioning de- however, similar SBS values were ob- approach provides micromechanical re-
creases the bond strength of the self- served among all dentin groups. Most tention, even without infiltration of
adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem; of the observed fractures were of the more than 1 mm in the surface of the
3M ESPE) because of its high viscosity, adhesive type, similar to what was re- dentin.20
which prevents penetration on the ported in other studies33,34 and thus The adhesion mechanisms are de-
collagen matrix and leads to the for- indicate valid values for the SBS results pendent on the micromechanical reten-
mation of a weak union between the obtained. tion and chemical interaction between
cement and tooth surface. Conversely, Results of some studies indicate the monomer and the hydroxyapatite
Barcellos et al14 found that pre- that the interface between the tooth acidic groups.1,23 Some cements form
treatment of dentin with phosphoric surface and self-adhesive cements is weak micromechanical interactions and
acid and adhesive increased the superficial and highly irregular, without weak chemical bonds with the calcium
bond strength of 2 self-adhesive resin demineralization of the smear layer and in teeth, depending on the type of acid
cements (Bifix [Voco]) (RelyX Unicem formation of a real hybrid layer, and monomer and neutralization mecha-
[3M ESPE]). possibly without resin tags.21,24 There- nism used.11 In line with several studies,
Results of the SEM analysis in- fore, this formation is likely an irregular the self-adhesive cementing ability of
dicates improved micromechanical re- layer of interaction between the cement RelyX Unicem relies on the action of
tention of dentin substrates with resin and the substrate. However, the in- the phosphoric acid methacrylate, also
in the groups that received surface dications from the photoelectron present in RelyX U100 and RelyX U200,
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Rodrigues et al
- 2014 7

6 Scanning electron microscope image (1000 magnification) of specimens with U200 self-adhesive resin cement in
enamel and dentin after shear bond strength test. A, Group enamel-U200; note that micromechanical retention is not
evident. B, Group enamel-phosphoric acid-U200; note that, in spite of prior acid etching, it was not possible to see
micromechanical retention. C, Group dentin-U200, mechanical interaction between cement and dentin was not observed.
D, Group dentin-phosphoric acid-U200; note that acid etching increased micromechanical retention between cement and
dentinal tubules.

7 Scanning electron microscope image (1000 magnification) of specimens with ARC conventional resin cement in enamel
and dentin after shear bond strength test. A, Group enamel-phosphoric acid-ARC; note that micromechanical retention was
evident between enamel and cement. B, Group dentin-phosphoric acid-ARC; note micromechanical retention between
cement and dentinal tubules.

which demineralizes and infiltrates the adhesive cements provide satisfactory However, long-term clinical studies are
tooth surface and provides micro- results regarding the bond strength in needed to confirm self-adhesives
mechanical retention.23,30 Usually, self- enamel and dentin in in vitro studies. cement effectiveness.
Rodrigues et al
8 Volume - Issue -

CONCLUSIONS 10. Vrochari AD, Eliades G, Hellwig E, Wrbas KT. 25. Buonocore MG. A simple method of
Curing efficiency of four self-etching, self- increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling ma-
adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 2009;25: terials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res
The U200 self-adhesive cement had 1104-8. 1955;34:849-53.
similar bond strength to the ARC in 11. Burgess JO, Ghuman T, Cakir D. Self-adhe- 26. Nakabayashi N. Resin reinforced dentine due
the enamel, but the combination with sive resin cements. J Esthet Restor Dent to infiltration of monomers into dentine at
2010;22:412-9. the adhesive interface. Dent Mater J 1982;1:
phosphoric acid had the best bond 12. De Angelis F, Minnoni A, Vitalone LM, 78-81.
strength. In dentin, self-adhesive and Carluccio F, Vadini M, Paolantonio M, et al. 27. Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Braem M,
conventional resin cements had similar Bond strength evaluation of three self- Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Morphological
adhesive luting systems used for cementing aspects of the resin-dentin interdiffusion zone
bond strength values, so both cements composite and porcelain. Oper Dent with different dentin adhesive systems. J Dent
can be used with the same adhesion 2011;36:626-34. Res 1992;71:1530-40.
effectiveness. In relation to the failure 13. Duke ES. New technology directions in resin 28. Pashley DH, Ciucchi B, Sano H, Horner JA.
cements. Compend Contin Educ Dent Permeability of dentin to adhesive resins.
mode, most of the failures were with
2003;24:606-8,10. Quintessence Int 1993;24:618-31.
the adhesive mode for all groups, 14. Barcellos DC, Batista GR, Silva MA, Rangel PM, 29. Eick ID, Miller RG, Robinson SI, Bowles CO,
except for the enamel-phosphoric acid- Torres CR, Fava M. Evaluation of bond strength Gutshall PL, Chappelow CC. Quantitative
U200 group (mixed mode). of self-adhesive cements to dentin with or analysis of the dentin adhesive interface by
without application of adhesive systems. Auger spectroscopy. J Dent Res 1996;75:
J Adhes Dent 2011;13:261-5. 1027-33.
REFERENCES 15. Sanares AM, Itthagarun A, King NM, 30. Abo-Hamar SE, Hiller KA, Jung H,
Tay FR, Pashley DH. Adverse surface Federlin M, Friedl KH, Schmalz G. Bond
1. Radovic I, Monticelli F, Goracci C, interactions between one-bottle light- strength of a new universal self-adhesive resin
Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Self-adhesive resin polymerized adhesives and chemical- luting cement to dentin and enamel. Clin
cements: a literature review. J Adhes Dent polymerized composites. Dent Mater Oral Investig 2005;9:161-7.
2008;10:251-8. 2001;17:542-56. 31. Farrokh A, Mohsen M, Soheil S, Nazanin B.
2. Aguiar TR, Andre CB, Correr-Sobrinho L, 16. Burke FJ, Crisp RJ, Richter B. A practice- Shear bond strength of three self-adhesive
Arrais CA, Ambrosano GM, Giannini M. Ef- based evaluation of the handling of a new resin cements to dentin. Indian J Dent Res
fect of storage times and mechanical load self-adhesive universal resin luting material. 2012;23:221-5.
cycling on dentin bond strength of conven- Int Dent J 2006;56:142-6. 32. Goracci C, Cury AH, Cantoro A,
tional and self-adhesive resin luting cements. 17. Mak YF, Lai SC, Cheung GS, Chan AW, Papacchini F, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Microtensile
J Prosthet Dent 2014;111:404-10. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Micro-tensile bond bond strength and interfacial properties
3. Holderegger C, Sailer I, Schuhmacher C, testing of resin cements to dentin and an of self-etching and self-adhesive resin ce-
Schlapfer R, Hammerle C, Fischer J. Shear indirect resin composite. Dent Mater ments used to lute composite onlays
bond strength of resin cements to human 2002;18:609-21. under different seating forces. J Adhes Dent
dentin. Dent Mater 2008;24:944-50. 18. Viotti RG, Kasaz A, Pena CE, Alexandre RS, 2006;8:327-35.
4. Aguiar TR, Di Francescantonio M, Arrais CA, Reis AF. Microtensile bond 33. Hikita K, Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J,
Ambrosano GM, Giannini M. Effect of curing strength of new self-adhesive luting agents Ikeda T, Van Landuyt K, Maida T, et al.
mode on bond strength of self-adhesive resin and conventional multistep systems. Bonding effectiveness of adhesive luting
luting cements to dentin. J Biomed Mater Res J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:306-12. agents to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater
B Appl Biomater 2010;93:122-7. 19. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, 2007;23:71-80.
5. Duarte S Jr, Botta AC, Meire M, Sadan A. Okazaki M, Shintani H, et al. Comparative study 34. Luhrs AK, Guhr S, Gunay H, Geurtsen W.
Microtensile bond strengths and scanning on adhesive performance of functional mono- Shear bond strength of self-adhesive resins
electron microscopic evaluation of self- mers. J Dent Res 2004;83:454-8. compared to resin cements with etch and
adhesive and self-etch resin cements to intact 20. Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, rinse adhesives to enamel and dentin in vitro.
and etched enamel. J Prosthet Dent Ferrari M, Toledano M. Limited decalcifica- Clin Oral Investig 2010;14:193-9.
2008;100:203-10. tion/diffusion of self-adhesive cements into 35. Piwowarczyk A, Bender R, Ottl P, Lauer HC.
6. Hitz T, Stawarczyk B, Fischer J, dentin. J Dent Res 2008;87:974-9. Long-term bond between dual-polymerizing
Hammerle CH, Sailer I. Are self-adhesive 21. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, cementing agents and human hard dental
resin cements a valid alternative to conven- Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. tissue. Dent Mater 2007;23:211-7.
tional resin cements? A laboratory study of Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material 36. Walter R, Miguez PA, Pereira PN. Micro-
the long-term bond strength. Dent Mater to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 2004;20: tensile bond strength of luting materials to
2012;28:1183-90. 963-71. coronal and root dentin. J Esthet Restor Dent
7. Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A, Flury S. Bonding of 22. Ferracane JL, Stansbury JW, Burke FJ. Self- 2005;17:165-71.
restorative materials to dentin with various adhesive resin cements: chemistry, properties
luting agents. Oper Dent 2011;36:266-73. and clinical considerations. J Oral Rehabil Corresponding author:
8. Suzuki TY, Godas AG, Guedes AP, Catelan A, 2011;38:295-314. Dr Ana Flávia Sanches Borges
Pavan S, Briso AL, et al. Microtensile bond 23. Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, Zuchner H, Al. Octávio Pinheiro Brisola, 9-75
strength of resin cements to caries-affected Schafer E. Chemical analysis and bonding Bauru-SP 17012-901
dentin. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110:47-55. reaction of RelyX Unicem and Bifix compos- BRAZIL
9. Yaman BC, Ozer F, Takeichi T, Karabucak B, ites: a comparative study. Dent Mater E-mail: afborges@fob.usp.br
Koray F, Blatz MB. Effect of thermo- 2006;22:934-41.
mechanical aging on bond strength and 24. Al-Assaf K, Chakmakchi M, Palaghias G, Copyright ª 2014 by the Editorial Council for
interface morphology of glass fiber and zir- Karanika-Kouma A, Eliades G. Interfacial The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
conia posts bonded with a self-etch adhesive characteristics of adhesive luting resins and
and a self-adhesive resin cement to natural composites with dentine. Dent Mater
teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:455-64. 2007;23:829-39.

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Rodrigues et al