| |
|
|
| Year : 2014 | Volume
: 17
| Issue : 5 | Page : 420-426 |
|
| Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review-Part II |
|
|
Kantheti Sirisha1, Tankonda Rambabu2, Yalavarthi Ravishankar3, Pabbati Ravikumar4
1 Departments of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, GITAM Dental College and Hospital, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Departments of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College and Hospital, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India
3 Department of Prosthodontics, GITAM Dental College and Hospital, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
4 Departments of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, SIBAR Institute of Dental Sciences, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
Click here for correspondence address and email
| Date of Submission | 02-Mar-2014 |
| Date of Decision | 20-May-2014 |
| Date of Acceptance | 04-Jun-2014 |
| Date of Web Publication | 1-Sep-2014 |
|
|
 |
|
 Abstract | | |
Background: Macro-bond strength tests resulted in cohesive failures and overestimation of bond strengths. To reduce the flaws, micro-bond strength tests were introduced. They are the most commonly used bond-strength tests.
Objective: Thus the objective of this review is to critically review the reliability of micro-bond strength tests used to evaluate resin-tooth interface.
Data Collection: Relevant articles published between January 1994 and July 2013 were collected from Pubmed database, Google scholar and hand searched journals of Conservative Dentistry, Endodontics and Dental materials.
Data Synthesis: Variables that influence the test outcome are categorized into substrate related factors, factors related to specimen properties, specimen preparation and test methodology. Impact of these variables on the test outcome is critically analyzed.
Conclusion: Micro-bond tests are more reliable than macro-bond tests. However, no standard format exists for reporting the bond strength tests which could lead to misinterpretation of the data and bonding abilities of adhesives. Keywords: Bond strength test; micro-tensile; micro-shear; micro-push out
How to cite this article:
Sirisha K, Rambabu T, Ravishankar Y, Ravikumar P. Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review-Part II. J Conserv Dent 2014;17:420-6 |
How to cite this URL:
Sirisha K, Rambabu T, Ravishankar Y, Ravikumar P. Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review-Part II. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2014 [cited 2023 Dec 2];17:420-6. Available from: https://www.jcd.org.in/text.asp?2014/17/5/420/139823 |
| Introduction | |  |
The rapid progress in dental adhesive technology has extensively influenced modern restorative dentistry. Despite the vast advances made in adhesive technology during the last 50 years, the bonded interface itself remains as a weakest point of an adhesive restoration. [1] Smaller test specimens are 'stronger' than larger ones due to the lower probability of presence of critical sized defects. [2] Thus micro-bond strength tests (bond area less than 3 mm 2 ) were developed [3] and higher apparent 'strength' can be measured with more failures at the interface. Unlike the macro tests, which were discussed in previous article (Validity of bond Strength tests-part I: A critical review on macro-bond strength test methods) failures are adhesive rather than cohesive. [4]
| Micro-Bond Strength Tests | | |
Micro-bond strength tests are categorized into three types: Micro-shear, micro-tensile and micro-push out tests based on the stresses exerted on the test specimens.
Micro-shear (μSBS) test
Shear bond strength (SBS) testing with bonded cross-sectional areas of 3 mm 2 or less is referred to as 'micro' SBS. [5],[6] It permits efficient screening of adhesive systems, regional and depth profiling of a variety of substrates, and conservation of teeth. A significant advantage over micro-tensile strength (μTBS) methods is that the μSBS specimen is pre-stressed prior to testing only by mold removal. However, the use of the mold for composite placement can lead to the introduction of flaws and different stress concentrations upon shear loading. [7]
The findings of Finite Element Analysis (FEA) reported uneven stress distribution by creating tensile stresses too. [8],[9] A three-dimensional FEA [10] demonstrated minimized tensile forces during loading by optimizing specimen dimensions and load application location. Micro-shear test results may actually worse represent shear bond strength than the conventional macro-SBS test. [9] Area delimitation technique renders μSBS testing less questionable and should be considered as an important step during the application of the method. [11]
Micro-shear tests remain an extremely useful test for those substrates with properties such as glass ionomers or enamel that make them particularly susceptible to the specimen preparation effects and testing conditions of μTBS testing. [4]
Micro-tensile (μTBS) test
In micro-tensile test, further specimen processing or the actual preparation of the micro-specimens is required after the bonding procedure. [12] Advantages are that it involves better economic use of teeth (with multiple micro specimens originating from one tooth), the better control of regional differences (e.g. peripheral versus central dentin), the better stress distribution at the true interface, [3] ability to test irregular surfaces and very small areas and facilitates microscopic examinations of the failed bonds due to smaller areas. Drawbacks are the labor intensity, technical demand, dehydration potential of these smaller samples, difficulty in measuring bond strengths lower than 5MPa, difficulty in fabricating specimens with consistent geometry, easily damaged specimens and loss or fracture of post-fracture specimens. [12],[13] Micro-tensile bond test (μTBS) allowed additional research designs that the 'macro' tests did not, such as, the elimination of tooth dependency through balanced designs. [14]
Micro-push out (μPO) test
Micro-push-out test is a modification of push out test where the specimen thickness is less than or equal to 1 mm 2 . Micro-tensile bond strength test method is not appropriate for use with intracanal filling materials because of the high percentage of premature bond failures and the large variation in test results. [15] Micro-push out is more dependable than the micro tensile technique while measuring the bond strength of luted fiber posts. [16] A study [17] reported that a modified push-out approach and micro-tensile test revealed higher values than traditional pull-out and push-out methods. But this modified push-out approach needs more studies before making any conclusions.
| Variables Influencing Micro-Bond Strength Test Results | | |
Variables related to the clinical situation and the substrate treatment
Many variables related to clinical situation and substrate affect the micro-bond strengths [Figure 1].
Substrate related factors
Source of teeth
0Unlike the contradictory results of macro-tests, bovine teeth were found to be better substitutes for human teeth than porcine teeth for micro-tests. In porcine teeth, the enamel prism orientation is different from that of human enamel. [18] Lopes [19] found many structural similarities between human and swine teeth and suggested use of porcine teeth. Morphological, chemical composition and physical property differences between human and bovine teeth must be considered when interpreting results obtained from any experiment with bovine teeth substrate. [20] For more predictable results, use of human teeth is recommended.
Substrate condition
Micro-tests have the added advantage of ability to test the bond strengths to various substrates like sclerotic, infected or affected carious dentin, hypoplastic enamel etc. Micro-tensile bond strength to caries-affected dentin [21],[22] and sclerotic dentin [23],[24] was lower when compared with that of normal dentin. This was due to decreased resin infiltration into dentinal tubules of caries-affected dentin by the mineral deposits. [25] Mechanical treatment with diamond bur or diamond paste [24] or conditioning with stronger acids may facilitate stronger bonding to sclerotic dentin. [23]
Dentin depth and permeability
Majority of studies showed decreased micro-tensile [26],[27] and micro-shear bond strengths [28] with increased dentin depths unlike the varied results of macro-tests. This may be due to increased permeability [29] and reduced percentage of solid dentin available for bonding. It is advisable to consider the type of adhesives while interpreting the results of bond strength tests.
Smear layer
Smear layer denseness, more so than thickness, may compromise bonding efficacy of adhesives, especially of self-etch systems. [30] Smear layer thickness did not affect the bond strengths in majority of the studies but the type of adhesive affected the bond strengths. [31],[32] Higher bond strengths were noted with etch and rinse systems where smear layer was removed [31] and with agitated self etching systems where smear layer was dispersed or dissolved. [33]
Enamel prism and dentinal tubule orientation
The effects of regional variations in tooth structure, such as the orientation of enamel prisms, orientation of dentinal tubules and the influence of cavity geometry on bond strength, are variously studied, in which the results were contradictory like macro-tests. This may be because of structural anisotropy; variation in enamel bonding sites and the type of adhesive. [28],[34],[35]
Substrate location
Substrate location can be occlusal, cervical, buccal or gingival and root or crown. Micro-tensile bond strength to enamel [36] and dentin [35],[37],[38] and micro-shear [28] bond strengths to dentin varied depending on the location of substrate similar to that of macro-tests. Majority of the authors concluded that results depended on the type of adhesive system. [35],[38]
Pulpal pressure
The presence of pulpal pressure resulted in a decrease of μTBS of various bonding systems while simulating in vivo conditions. [39],[40] Few studies reported reduction of μTBS was adhesive-dependent, [41],[42] which is similar to macro-bond strengths. One study, [43] reported no bond strength reduction when adhesives were applied to dentin supplied with water pressure.
Tooth donor age
Physical properties and morphological features of enamel and dentin vary with age progression. Age did not affect bond strength values of glass-ionomer based, all-in-one, single-step, self-etching adhesive system to dental hard tissues. [44],[45],[46]
Storage conditions and time
Distilled water, saline, 0.05% saturated solution of thymol, 0.5% chloramines-T, 2% gluteraldehyde, 10% formalin solutions were studied as storage media for bond-strength tests. [47],[48] Zheng et al. [49] recommended use of frozen teeth at −20 o C or storage of teeth in 1% chloramine at 4 o C. Before using any teeth that were preserved in dry state, rehydration with distilled water for two weeks is recommended. [50]
Teeth that have been extracted for longer than six months could undergo degenerative changes in dentinal protein. [47] According to the ISO/TS 11405, teeth those were stored for one month, but not more than six months, after extraction should be used. [51]
Variables related to test specimen properties
Bonding area
Bond area depends on the specimen size; hence it is discussed in detail under the section of 'specimen size'.
Elastic modulus of the resin composite
Mechanical properties of composite can affect the bond-strength test results. High elastic modulus of bonded composite, relative adhesive layer thickness and load application distance resulted in non-uniform stress distribution along bonded interfaces. [9] Mechanical properties of the composite affected the μTBS values due to uneven stress distribution. [52]
Variables related to specimen preparation for bond strength testing
Aging media
0Various solutions like distilled water, artificial saliva and sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) were used for aging. [47] No change in micro-tensile bond strength was observed after six months of water storage [53] whereas another study [54] observed sensitivity of resin-dentin bond to water degradation for four years. It was concluded that resin bonded to enamel protected the resin-dentin bond against degradation, while direct exposure to water for four years affected bonds.
Failure analysis of immersed test specimens in sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) revealed a drop in μTBS correlated with specific dissolution of the hybrid layer, similar to in vivo failure patterns. [55],[56] Thus aging specimens in 10% NaOCl for 1 or 3 hours can be an alternative method for long-term water storage (6 or 12 months) micro-tensile bond strength studies. [57] Main drawback of this method is due to the non-specific properties; NaOCl also causes the mechanical properties of the dentin substrate itself to deteriorate. [58]
Aging time
Aging in artificial saliva for more than six months reduced bond strength. [56] One year water storage did not have any effect on micro-tensile bond strength [59] whereas three year storage reduced the bond strength. [60] Effect of aging time on micro-tensile bond strength varied with the medium used for aging and type of adhesive. [61]
Thermal cycling
Researchers reported diverse results though majority of them concluded that thermocycling reduced the bond strength to enamel and dentin. [56],[62],[63],[64],[65],[66],[67],[68],[69] The effect of thermocycling depends on the chemical bonding potential of functional monomer, i.e. type of adhesive system. [64] Very few studies employed the thermocycling at a frequency of 500 cycles as recommended by ISO/TS specification. If it exceeds this frequency, bond strength was reduced in majority of these studies. Hence, for reliable results ISO/TS recommendations must be followed.
Mechanical cycling
Amount of load exerted while chewing and swallowing varies between 70N and 150N. [70] Load application of 500,000 cycles is equivalent to six months and 1,000,000 cycles is equivalent to one year of in vivo mastication. [71] Researchers used loads ranging from 50N to 125N at frequencies ranging from 0.5 Hz to 4 Hz. [62],[63],[68],[72],[73],[74],[75] Number of cycles ranged from 10,000 cycles to 500,000 cycles. Mechanical cycling resulted in mixed type of failures and bond strength was reduced in specimens when they were subjected to thermal and mechanical cycling. [68],[72],[73]
Operator skill and technique sensitivity
Operator's skill in handling a material and/or using the test apparatus may affect the measured micro-shear bond strength. Operator skills may improve with repeated testing and material use. [76] In contrast to this, no statistically significant difference was observed in micro-push out bond strength values between the operators of different clinical experience. [77] Though adequate literature is not available regarding its effect on micro-tensile bond strength, operator skill can increase the reliability of test results.
Variables of influence related to test mechanics
Specimen size
The micro-specimen preparation protocols are more technique-sensitive. For the micro test methods 'trimmed' and 'non-trimmed' micro-specimens are prepared and both have their advantages and disadvantages. [52],[78] A reduction of bond strength was observed in enamel [36] , when the bonding area was increased from 0.5 to 3.0 mm 2 . Similar phenomenon was observed in specimen sizes with 1.2 and 2.0 mm in diameter where an inverse linear relationship between specimen size and bond strength when tested either in tension or shear [5] and that cross-sectional shape (cylindrical or rectangular) has little effect on micro-tensile bond strength. [79]
Specimen geometry
Stick shaped, hour glass and dumbbell-shaped specimens are used for micro-tensile testing. Trimming the specimens at the interface to hourglass-shaped specimens better concentrates stress at the interface and may result in premature failures due to interfacial defects. [80]
Interfaces can be trimmed by free hand using a dental handpiece [3],[81] or a plexiglass table on an Isomet saw (Buehler, Lake Forest, IL, USA) and trim the specimen under microscopic observation, using a device like table saw. [12] Use of a semi-automatic trimming of micro-specimens using a Micro Specimen Former (University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA) is highly advisable to trim rectangular specimens into specimens with a circular cross-section. [82]
Dumbbell-shaped specimens distribute the stress more uniformly due to their cylindrical geometry and boundary conditions only if manufacturing process would be improved (like CAD-CAM® process) to reduce imperfections into the interface. Otherwise, stick-shaped, non-trimmed specimens sectioned with diamond wire are preferred for enamel specimens as they can be prepared in a less destructive, easier, and more precise way. [83]
Other factors such as specimen-jig attachment, specimen-loading speed and specimen alignment also influence the final outcome; and therefore, should be standardized within the test set-up. [84]
One major concern is the required number of individual teeth from which many micro-specimens can be prepared to be statistically sound. [85] An elegant way to handle this problem is to use every tooth as its own control. [82] As also recommended by ISO/TS No. 11405 [51] , another way would be to apply survival analysis like the Weibull model or Cox proportional hazard using the force that is required for bond failure. [86]
Gripping devices
Test specimens are attached to the load train couplers of mechanical testing machines by either active or passive gripping devices. A non-normal load application, either the specimen or gripping mechanism significantly alters the stress distribution at the bonded interface. [87] Several specimen gripping devices, both active and passive, have been developed in an attempt to apply a tensile load normal to the bond line by aligning specimen's bond line with its gripping surfaces. [84],[88],[89] Active gripping can be either mechanical or through a fast-setting glue. Bending forces can occur during load application due to: Non-parallel specimen alignment, bond line not perpendicular to the specimen gripping surfaces, and/or, uneven gripping forces. [87],[90]
These specimen-fixation procedures require careful manipulation and special test jigs like Bencor multi-T gripping device and Ciucchi's jig. None of these gripping devices guarantees proper alignment because the specimen is glued to a flat surface. [84] In Geraldeli's jig and modified Ciucchi's jig, a groove parallel to the applied load was added in to improve specimen alignment. [88]
Dirck's device was introduced as self aligning, glue-less, passive gripping device. [30] It is less sensitive to human error than Geraldeli's, and produced a more uniform stress distribution at the dumbbell specimen adhesive layer than did the Geraldeli's device at the stick layer. [91] Poitevin et al. [27],[84] , developed a μTBS testing device with top bottom fixation to minimize stress concentrations.
Cross-head speed
Cross-head speeds ranging from 0.01 mm/min to 10.00 mm/min were tested for their influence on micro-tensile bond strength test. Unlike controversial results of macro-tests, all the studies concluded that the influence of the cross-head speed might be negligible while measuring micro-tensile bond strengths. [27],[92] Poitevin et al. recommended a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min for more uniform stress-time pattern. [27]
| Fractographic Analysis | | |
Fractographic analysis includes classification of the interfacial phases, crack initiation, direction and pattern of crack propagation, energetics of the fracture (single event or fatigue; brittle or ductile), and the phases included along the fracture plane. [93]
Possible failure modes [Figure 2] of fractographic analysis are:
- Cohesive in dentin,
- Cohesive in resin,
- Adhesive (dentin-adhesive interface),
- Adhesive (resin-adhesive interface),
- Mixed (dentin-adhesive-resin with small portions of dentin),
- Mixed (dentin-adhesive-resin with large portions of dentin).
Depending on the fracture path, cohesive failures and mixed failures with large portions of dentin and resin should be excluded in results. [94] To characterize the adhesive joints several surface analysis methods are available, including electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis (ESCA), secondary ion mass spectroscopy (SIMS), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), Raman spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and atomic force microscopy (AFM). [95]
| Clinical Relevance | | |
In a systematic review [96] , the results of bond strength tests did not correlate with laboratory tests that evaluated the marginal seal of restorations such as micro leakage or gap analysis. Though there was no significant correlation between micro-tensile bond strength data and the clinical index, there existed a correlation between micro-tensile bond strength and 6-month water storage and marginal discoloration of Class V restorations. A significant, quite reasonable correlation was nevertheless found between the aged bond-strength data and the 5-year clinical data. Hence, besides measuring the 'immediate' bond strength of adhesives to enamel and dentin, measuring the 'aged' bond strength should be encouraged in order to predict the clinical effectiveness of adhesives. [82]
Bond-strength test results of specimens after 24 hours and 3 months of storage in water should be comparable with those of comparable adhesive systems with an acceptable, proven clinical record. [96] Non-invasive methods of bond evaluation like X-ray micro computed tomography (CT) and acoustic emission can be considered while testing adhesives. [97]
| Recommendations for Improving Validity of Micro-Tests | | |
Specific recommendations are put forth for consideration while testing the adhesive strengths.
- If traditional bond strength tests (shear, micro-shear, tensile, micro-tensile) are to be used, only adhesive failures or mixed failures with small (<10%) resin or dentin involvement should be considered for the bond strength calculation. This requires thorough microscopic evaluation (stereo and SEM) of the fractured surface.
- Use of Weilbul statistics should be systematically applied to evaluate bond strength data to provide more information that is relevant. Studies should utilize a minimum of 30 non-cohesive failed specimens.
- Fracture mechanics approach that includes estimation of fracture toughness or the strain energy release rate is encouraged. [94]
| Conclusion | | |
Bond strength testing can be used in the laboratory while developing newer adhesives but cannot be used solely as a means of predicting clinical performance. [98] Bonding effectiveness in the laboratory should be assessed by
- Micro-tensile bond strength testing,
- Sealing effectiveness testing using semi-quantitative marginal analysis or fully quantitative margin permeability measurement and possibly
- Dynamic fatigue testing. [82]
Though a great diversity in laboratory testing of adhesives exists, validity of these tests can be improved by application of standardized protocols in test methodology and supplementing with the dynamic fatigue test results. The guidelines of ISO Technical Specification (No. 11405) on "Testing on adhesion to tooth structure" should be followed while assessing bonding efficacy.
| Acknowledgment | | |
Dr. Anupreeta Anwarullah for her contribution in providing the image of micro-shear bond strength test.
| References | | |
| 1. | De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: Methods and results. J Dent Res 2005;84:118-32. 
|
| 2. | Griffith AA. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Philo Trans R Soc (Lon) 1920;A 221:168-98.
|
| 3. | Sano H, Shono T, Sonoda H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Carvalho R, et al. Relationship between surface area for adhesion and tensile bond strength - evaluation of a micro-tensile bond test. Dent Mater 1994;10:236-40.
|
| 4. | Armstrong S, Geraldeli S, Maia R, Raposo LH, Soares CJ, Yamagawa J. Adhesion to tooth structure: A critical review of "micro" bond strength test methods. Dent Mater 2010;26:e50-62.
|
| 5. | Phrukkanon S, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Effect of cross sectional surface area on bond strengths between resin and dentin. Dent Mater 1998;14:120-8.
|
| 6. | Shimada Y, Senawongse P, Harnirattisai C, Burrow MF, Nakaoki Y, Tagami J. Bond strength of two adhesive systems to primary and permanent enamel. Oper Dent 2002;27:403-9.
|
| 7. | Van Noort R, Cardew GE, Howard IC, Noroozi S. The effect of local interfacial geometry on the measurement of the tensile bond strength to dentin. J Dent Res 1991;70:889-93.
|
| 8. | DeHoff PH, Anusavice KJ, Wang Z. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the shear bond test. Dent Mater 1995;11:126-31.
|
| 9. | Placido E, Meira JB, Lima RG, Muench A, de Souza RM, Ballester RY. Shear versus micro-shear bond strength test: A finite element stress analysis. Dent Mater 2007;23:1086-92.
|
| 10. | McDonough WG, Antonucci JM, He J, Shimada Y, Chiang MY, Schumacher GE, et al. A microshear test to measure bond strengths of dentin-polymer interfaces. Biomaterials 2002;23:3603-8.
|
| 11. | Shimaoka AM, de Andrade AP, Cardoso MV, de Carvalho RC. The importance of adhesive area delimitation in a microshear bond strength experimental design J Adhes Dent 2011;13:307-14.
|
| 12. | Pashley DH, Carvalho RM, Sano H, Nakajima M, Yoshiyama M, Shono Y, et al. The microtensile bond test: A review. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:299-309.
|
| 13. | Pashley DH, Sano H, Ciucchi B, Yoshiyama M, Carvalho RM. Adhesion testing of dentin bonding agents: A review. Dent Mater 1995;11:117-25.
|
| 14. | Cardoso PE, Braga RR, Carrilho MR. Evaluation of micro-tensile, shear and tensile tests determining the bond strength of three adhesive systems. Dent Mater 1998;14:394-8.
|
| 15. | Soares CJ, Santana FR, Castro CG, Santos-Filho PC, Soares PV, Qian F, et al. Finite element analysis and bond strength of a glass post to intraradicular dentin: Comparison between microtensile and pushout tests. Dent Mater 2008;24:1405-11.
|
| 16. | Goracci C, Tavares AU, Fabianelli A, Monticelli F, Raffaelli O, Cardoso PC, et al. The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: Comparison between microtensile and push-out bond strength measurements. Eur J Oral Sci 2004;112:353-61.
|
| 17. | Castellan CS, Santos-Filho PC, Soares PV, Soares CJ, Cardoso PE. Measuring bond strength between fiber post and root dentin: A comparison of different tests. J Adhes Dent 2010;12:477-85.
|
| 18. | Reis AF, Giannini M, Kavaguchi A, Soares CJ, Line SR. Comparison of microtensile bond strength to enamel and dentin of human, bovine, and porcine teeth. J Adhes Dent 2004;6:117-21.
|
| 19. | Lopes FM, Markarian RA, Sendyk CL, Duarte CP, Arana-Chavez VE. Swine teeth as potential substitutes for in-vitro studies in tooth adhesion: A SEM observation. Arch Oral Biol 2006;51:548-51.
|
| 20. | Yassen GH, Platt JA, Hara AT. Bovine teeth as substitute for human teeth in dental research: A review of literature. J Oral Sci 2011;53:273-82.
|
| 21. | Pereira PN, Nunes MF, Miguez PA, Swift EJ Jr. Bond strengths of a one-step self-etching system to caries-affected and normal dentin. Oper Dent 2006;31:677-81.
|
| 22. | Yoshiyama M, Tay FR, Torii Y, Nishitani Y, Itou K, Ciucchi B, et al. Resin adhesion to carious dentin. Am J Dent 2003;16:47-52.
|
| 23. | Kwong SM, Cheung GS, Kei LH, Itthagarun A, Smales RJ, Tay FR, et al. Micro-tensile bond strengths to sclerotic dentin using a self etching and a total-etching technique. Dent Mater 2002;18:359-69.
|
| 24. | Camargo MA, Roda MI, Marques MM, de Cara AA. Micro-tensile bond strength to bovine sclerotic dentin: Influence of surface treatment. J Dent 2008;36:922-7.
|
| 25. | Say EC, Nakajima M, Senawongse P, Soyman M, Ozer F, Tagami J. Bonding to sound vs. caries-affected dentin using photo- and dual cure adhesives. Oper Dent 2005;30:90-8.
|
| 26. | Yoshikawa T, Sano H, Burrow MF, Tagami J, Pashley DH. Effect of dentin depth and cavity configuration on bond strength. J Dent Res 1999;78:898-905.
|
| 27. | Poitevin A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Coutinho E, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, et al. Critical analysis of the influence of different parameters on the microtensile bond strength of adhesives to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2008;10:7-16.
|
| 28. | Sattabanasuk V, Shimada Y, Tagami J. The bond of resin to different dentin surface characteristics. Oper Dent 2004;29:333-41.
|
| 29. | Pereira PN, Okuda M, Sano H, Yoshikawa T, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Effect of intrinsic wetness and regional difference on dentin bond strength. Dent Mater 1999;15:46-53.
|
| 30. | Sattabanasuk V, Vachiramon V, Qian F, Armstrong SR. Resin-dentin bond strength as related to different surface preparation methods. J Dent 2007;35:467-75.
|
| 31. | Kenshima S, Reis A, Uceda-Gomez N, Tancredo Lde L, Filho LE, Nogueira FN, et al. Effect of smear layer thickness and pH of self-etching adhesive systems on the bond strength and gap formation to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:117-26.
|
| 32. | Reis A, Grandi V, Carlotto L, Bortoli G, Patzlaff R, Rodrigues Accorinte Mde L, et al. Effect of smear layer thickness and acidity of self-etching solutions on early and long-term bond strength to dentin. J Dent 2005;33:549-59.
|
| 33. | Chan KM, Tay FR, King NM, Imazato S, Pashley DH. Bonding of mild self-etching primers/adhesives to dentin with thick smear layers. Am J Dent 2003;16:340-6.
|
| 34. | Shimada Y, Tagami J. Effects of regional enamel and prism orientation on resin bonding. Oper Dent 2003;28:20-7.
|
| 35. | Phrukkanon S, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The effect of dentine location and tubule orientation on the bond strengths between resin and dentine. J Dent 1999;27:265-74.
|
| 36. | Shono Y, Terashita M, Pashley EL, Brewer PD, Pashley DH. Effects of cross-sectional area on resin-enamel tensile bond strength. Dent Mater 1997;13:290-6.
|
| 37. | Purk JH, Healy M, Dusevich V, Glaros A, Eick JD. In vitro microtensile bond strength of four adhesives tested at the gingival and pulpal walls of Class II restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1414-8.
|
| 38. | Cavalcanti AN, Mitsui FH, Ambrosano GM, Mathias P, Marchi GM. Dentin bonding on different walls of a class II preparation. J Adhes Dent 2008;10:17-23.
|
| 39. | Moll K, Park HJ, Haller B. Effect of simulated pulpal pressure on dentin bond strength of self-etching bonding systems. Am J Dent 2005;18:335-9.
|
| 40. | Hiraishi N, Yiu CK, King NM, Tay FR. Effect of pulpal pressure on the microtensile bond strength of luting resin cements to human dentin. Dent Mater 2009;25:58-66.
|
| 41. | Hosaka K, Nakajima M, Monticelli F, Carrilho M, Yamauti M, Aksornmuang J, et al. Influence of hydrostatic pulpal pressure on the microtensile bond strength of all-in-one self-etching adhesives. J Adhes Dent 2007;9:437-42.
|
| 42. | Sauro S, Pashley DH, Montanari M, Chersoni S, Carvalho RM, Toledano M, et al. Effect of simulated pulpal pressure on dentin permeability and adhesion of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2007;23:705-13.
|
| 43. | Abdalla AI, Elsayed HY, Garcia-Godoy F. Effect of hydrostatic pulpal water pressure on microtensile bond strength of self-etch adhesives to dentin. Am J Dent 2008;21:233-8.
|
| 44. | Giannini M, Chaves P, Oliveira MT. Effect of tooth age on bond strength to dentin. J Appl Oral Sci 2003;11:342-7.
|
| 45. | Brackett WW, Tay FR, Looney SW, Ito S, Haisch LD, Pashley DH. The effect of subject age on the microtensile bond strengths of a resin and a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive to tooth structure. Oper Dent 2008;33:282-6.
|
| 46. | Ozer F, Sengun A, Ozturk B, Say EC, Tagami J. Effect of tooth age on microtensile bond strength of two fluoride-releasing bonding agents. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:289-95.
|
| 47. | Perdigao J. Dentin bonding - Variables related to the clinical situation and the substrate treatment. Dent Mater 2010;26:e24-37.
|
| 48. | Tosun G, Sener Y, Sengun A. Effect of storage duration/solution on microshear bond strength of composite to enamel. Dent Mater J 2007;26:116-21.
|
| 49. | Zheng TL, Huang C, Zhang ZX, Wang S, Zhang G. Influence of storage methods on microtensile bond strength of dentin adhesive system. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 2005;14:147-50.
|
| 50. | Mobarak EH, El-Badrawy W, Pashley DH, Jamjoom H. Effect of pretest storage conditions of extracted teeth on their dentin bond strengths. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104:92-7.
|
| 51. | Technical specification ISO/TS 11405. Dental materials - testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Second ed. Switzerland; 2003.
|
| 52. | Neves Ade A, Coutinho E, Poitevin A, Van der Sloten J, Van Meerbeek B, Van Oosterwyck H. Influence of joint component mechanical properties and adhesive layer thickness on stress distribution in micro-tensile bond strength specimens. Dent Mater 2009;25:4-12.
|
| 53. | Cantanhede de Sá RB, Oliveira Carvalho A, Puppin-Rontani RM, Ambrosano GM, Nikaido T, Tagami J, et al. Effects of water storage on bond strength and dentin sealing ability promoted by adhesive systems. J Adhes Dent 2012;14:543-9.
|
| 54. | De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Suzuki K, et al. Four-year water degradation of total-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 2003;82:136-40.
|
| 55. | Yamauti M, Hashimoto M, Sano H, Ohno H, Carvalho RM, Kaga M, et al. Degradation of resin-dentin bonds using NaOCl storage. Dent Mater 2003;19:399-405.
|
| 56. | Saboia VP, Silva FC, Nato F, Mazzoni A, Cadenaro M, Mazzotti G, et al. Analysis of differential artificial ageing of the adhesive interface produced by a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;117:618-24.
|
| 57. | Garbui BU, Botta SB, Reis AF, Matos AB. Comparison of chemical aging and water immersion time on durability of resin-dentin interface produced by an etch-and-rinse adhesive. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13:464-71.
|
| 58. | Sim TP, Knowles JC, Ng YL, Shelton J, Gulabivala K. Effect of sodium hypochlorite on mechanical properties of dentine and tooth surface strain. Int Endod J 2001;34:120-32.
|
| 59. | Abdalla AI, El Eraki M, Feilzer AJ. The effect of direct and indirect water storage on the microtensile dentin bond strength of a total-etch and two self-etching adhesives. Am J Dent 2007;20:370-4.
|
| 60. | Abdalla AI. Effect of long-term water aging on microtensile bond strength of self-etch adhesives to dentin. Am J Dent 2010;23:29-33.
|
| 61. | Vuorinen AM, Dyer SR, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Effect of water storage on the Microtensile bond strength of composite resin to dentin using experimental rigid rod polymer modified primers. J Adhes Dent 2011;13:333-40.
|
| 62. | Nikaido T, Kunzelmann KH, Chen H, Ogata M, Harada N, Yamaguchi S, et al. Evaluation of thermal cycling and mechanical loading on bond strength of a self-etching primer system to dentin. Dent Mater 2002;18:269-75.
|
| 63. | Bedran-De-Castro AK, Pereira PN, Pimenta LA. Long-term bond strength of restorations subjected to thermo-mechanical stresses over time. Am J Dent 2004;17:337-41.
|
| 64. | Inoue S, Koshiro K, Yoshida Y, De Munck J, Nagakane K, Suzuki K, et al. Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 2005;84:1160-4.
|
| 65. | Samimi P, Filsoufi A, Fathpour K. Composite-Dentin bond strength of two adhesives in different conditions. Dent Res J 2008;4:36-9.
|
| 66. | Hariri I, Shimad Y, Sadr A, Ichinose S, Tagami J. The effects of aging on shear bond strength and nanoleakage expression of an etch-and-rinse adhesive on human enamel and dentin. J Adhes Dent 2011;14:235-43.
|
| 67. | Baracco B, Fuentes MV, Garrido MA, González-López S, Ceballos L. Effect of thermal aging on the tensile bond strength at reduced areas of seven current adhesives. Odontology 2013;101:177-85.
|
| 68. | Daneshkazemi AR, Davari AR, Ataei E, Dastjerdi F, Hajighasemi E. Effects of mechanical and thermal load cycling on micro tensile bond strength of clearfil SE bond to superficial dentin. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2013;10:202-9.
|
| 69. | Yun X, Li W, Ling C, Fok A. Effect of artificial aging on the bond durability of fissure sealants. J Adhes Dent 2013;15:251-8.
|
| 70. | Anderson DJ. Measurement of stress in mastication. I. J Dent Res 1956;35:664-70.
|
| 71. | Graf H. Bruxism. Dent Clin North Am 1969;13:659-65.
|
| 72. | Bedran-de-Castro AK, Pereira PN, Pimenta LA, Thompson JY. Effect of thermal and mechanical load cycling on microtensile bond strength of a total-etch adhesive system. Oper Dent 2004;29:150-6.
|
| 73. | Mitsui FH, Peris AR, Cavalcanti AN, Marchi GM, Pimenta LA. Influence of thermal and mechanical load cycling on microtensile bond strengths of total and self-etching adhesive systems. Oper Dent 2006;31:240-7.
|
| 74. | Toledano M, Osorio R, Albaladejo A, Aguilera FS, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Effect of cyclic loading on the microtensile bond strengths of total-etch and self-etch adhesives. Oper Dent 2006;31:25-32.
|
| 75. | Abdalla AI, El Zohairy AA, Aboushelib MM, Feilzer AJ. Influence of thermal and mechanical load cycling on the microtensile bond strength of self-etching adhesives. Am J Dent 2007;20:250-4.
|
| 76. | Adebayo OA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Bond strength test: Role of operator skill. Aust Dent J 2008;53:145-50.
|
| 77. | Simonetti M, Radovic I, Vano M, Cheiffi N, Goracci C, Tognini F, et al. The influence of operator variability on adhesive cementation of fiber posts. J Adhes Dent 2006;8:421-5.
|
| 78. | Neves Ade A, Coutinho E, Cardoso MV, Jaecques S, Lambrechts P, Sloten JV, et al. Influence of notch geometry and interface on stress concentration and distribution in micro-tensile bond strength specimens. J Dent 2008;36:808-15.
|
| 79. | Phrukkanon S, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The influence of cross-sectional shape and surface area on the microtensile bond test. Dent Mater 1998;14:212-21.
|
| 80. | Sadek FT, Monticelli F, Muench A, Ferrari M, Cardoso PE. A novel method to obtain microtensile specimens minimizing cut flaws. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006;78:7-14.
|
| 81. | Inoue S, Vargas MA, Abe Y, Yoshida Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, et al. Microtensile bond strength of eleven contemporary adhesives to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:237-45.
|
| 82. | Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Mine A, Van Ende A, Neves A, et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 2010;26:e100-21.
|
| 83. | Sadek FT, Muench A, Poiate IA, Junior EP, Cardosoa PE. Influence of specimens' design and manufacturing process on microtensile bond strength to enamel-Laboratory and FEA comparison. Mater Res 2010;13:253-60.
|
| 84. | Poitevin A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Coutinho E, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, et al. Influence of three specimen fixation modes on the micro-tensile bond strength of adhesives to dentin. Dent Mater J 2007;26:694-9.
|
| 85. | Roulet JF, Van Meerbeek B. Editorial: Statistics: A nuisance, a tool, or a must? J Adhes Dent 2007;9:287-8.
|
| 86. | Eckert GJ, Platt JA. A statistical evaluation of microtensile bond strength methodology for dental adhesives. Dent Mater 2007;23:385-91.
|
| 87. | Silva NR, Calamia CS, Harsono M, Carvalho RM, Pegoraro LF, Fernandes CA, et al. Bond angle effects on microtensile bonds: Laboratory and FEA comparison. Dent Mater 2006;22:314-24.
|
| 88. | Perdigao J, Geraldeli S, Carmo AR, Dutra HR. In vivo influence of residual moisture on microtensile bond strengths of one-bottle adhesives. J Esthet Restor Dent 2002;14:31-8.
|
| 89. | Staninec M, Marshall GW, Hilton JF, Pashley DH, Gansky SA, Marshall SJ, et al. Ultimate tensile strength of dentin: Evidence for a damage mechanics approach to dentin failure. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;63:342-5.
|
| 90. | Van Noort R, Noroozi S, Howard IC, Cardew G. A critique of bond strength measurements. J Dent 1989;17:61-7.
|
| 91. | Raposo LH, Armstrong SR, Maia RR, Quian F, Geraldeli S, Soares CJ. Effect of specimen gripping device, geometry and fixation method on microtensile bond strength, failure mode and stress distribution: Laboratory and finite element analyses. Dent Mater 2012;28:e50-62.
|
| 92. | Reis A, de Oliveira Bauer JR, Loguercio AD. Influence of crosshead speed on resin-dentin microtensile bond strength. J Adhes Dent 2004;6:275-8.
|
| 93. | Marshall SJ, Bayne SC, Baier R, Tomsia AP, Marshall GW. A review of adhesion science. Dent Mater 2010;26:e11-6.
|
| 94. | Scherrer SS, Cesar PF, Swain MV. Direct comparison of the bond strength results of the different test methods: A critical literature review. Dent Mater 2010;26:e78-93.
|
| 95. | Roeder L, Periera PN, Yamamoto T, Ilie N, Armstrong J, Ferracane J. Spotlight on bond strength testing - unravelling the complexities. Dent Mater 2011;27:1197-203.
|
| 96. | Heintze SD. Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between laboratory tests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation between marginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent 2007;9:77-106.
|
| 97. | Cho NY, Ferracane JL, Lee IB. Acoustic emission analysis of tooth-composite interfacial debonding. J Dent Res 2013;92:76-81.
|
| 98. | Sudsangiam S, van Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose? J Adhes Dent 1999;1:57-67.
|
Correspondence Address:
Kantheti Sirisha
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, GITAM Dental College and Hospital, Visakhapatnam - 530 045, Andhra Pradesh
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.139823
[Figure 1], [Figure 2] |
|
| This article has been cited by | | 1 |
Effect of different surface treatment protocols on the bond strength between lithium disilicate and resin cements |
|
| Bilal Maqbool, Heleine Maria Chagas Rego, Gildo Coelho Santos, Nilgun Ari, Maria Jacinta Moraes Coelho Santos | | Odontology. 2023; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 2 |
Optimizing Dental Bond Strength: Insights from Comprehensive Literature Review and Future Implications for Clinical Practice |
|
| Yung-Shin Fan-Chiang, Peng-Chen Chou, Yu-Wen Hsiao, Yu-Hsuan Cheng, Yi Huang, Yu-Chieh Chiu, Yu-Ju Lin, Yuichi Mine, Sheng-Wei Feng, I-Ta Lee, Tzu-Yu Peng | | Biomedicines. 2023; 11(11): 2995 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 3 |
Effect of Different Application Modalities on the Bonding Performance of Adhesive Systems to Dentin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
|
| Louis Hardan, Rim Bourgi, Carlos Enrique Cuevas-Suárez, Walter Devoto, Maciej Zarow, Paulo Monteiro, Natalia Jakubowicz, Amine El Zoghbi, Dariusz Skaba, Davide Mancino, Naji Kharouf, Youssef Haïkel, Monika Lukomska-Szymanska | | Cells. 2023; 12(1): 190 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 4 |
Effect of Different Etching Times on Pit-and-Fissure Sealant Micro-Shear Bond Strength to the Enamel of Primary Teeth |
|
| Johnny Kharouba, Anna Annael Gonoratsky, Tamar Brosh, Mahmoud Masri, Rabea Iraqi, Sigalit Blumer | | Children. 2023; 10(3): 461 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 5 |
Assessment of Shear Bond Strength to Sound and Artificial Caries Affected Dentin Using Different Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study |
|
| ZahraaSalman Al-Obaidi, HaiderHasan Jasim | | Dental Hypotheses. 2023; 14(1): 10 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 6 |
Analyses of Experimental Dental Adhesives Based on Zirconia/Silver Phosphate Nanoparticles |
|
| Abdul Samad Khan, Yasmin Alhamdan, Hala Alibrahim, Khalid S. Almulhim, Muhammad Nawaz, Syed Zubairuddin Ahmed, Khalid Aljuaid, Ijlal Shahrukh Ateeq, Sultan Akhtar, Mohammad Azam Ansari, Intisar Ahmad Siddiqui | | Polymers. 2023; 15(12): 2614 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 7 |
Effect of Various Beverages on Adhesion of Repaired CAD/CAM Restorative Materials |
|
| Elif Yigit, Hamiyet Güngör Erdogan, Tan Firat Eyüboglu, Mutlu Özcan | | Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2023; 14(7): 380 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 8 |
Microtensile Bond Strength of Packable and Flowable Bulk-fill Composite Resin-based Restorative Materials to Dentin |
|
| Vibha Hegde, Mrunalini J Vaidya, Komal Sanjay Jadhav | | Journal of Operative Dentistry & Endodontics. 2023; 7(1): 6 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 9 |
A Comparative Study of the Repair Bond Strength of New Self-Adhesive Restorative Materials With a Resin Composite Material |
|
| Sanem Ozaslan, Ozge Celiksoz, Hatice Tepe, Begum Tavas, Batu Can Yaman | | Cureus. 2023; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 10 |
Phytic Acid: A Novel Dentine Conditioning Agent for Glass Ionomer Cement Restorations: An In Vitro Scanning Electron Microscopic Study |
|
| D. P. Souparnika, Binila S. Babu, Nithin Shetty, Fareeha Imteyaz, Gayathri Parthiban, G. Vinay Kumar | | Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences. 2023; 15(Suppl 1): S391 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 11 |
To Evaluate and Compare the Effect of Various Surface Treatment Modalities on Shear Bond Strength of Composite to Polyetherketoneketone and SEM Analysis: An In vitro Study |
|
| Arushi Chopra, Roma Goswami, Deepesh Saxena, Anshul Trivedi | | Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2023; 14(3): 206 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 12 |
Comparative evaluation of the effect of 37% orthophosphoric acid pre-etching on the microtensile enamel bond strength using universal adhesive and two-step self-etch adhesive systems – An in vitro study |
|
| Krutika Menon, Siddheswaran Vijayaraghavan, NM Dhanyakumar | | Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics. 2023; 26(6): 671 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 13 |
Monolitik CAD/CAM Bloklara Uygulanan Farkli Yüzey Uygulamalari ve Simanlarla Baglanti Kuvvetine Güncel Bak |
|
| Sehrize Dilara UGUZ, Volkan TURP | | Akdeniz Medical Journal. 2022; 8(1): 91 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 14 |
Bond Strength between CAD/CAM PMMA Denture Base Resins and Characterisation Composites |
|
| Mei Ting Pong, Anastasiia Grymak, John Neil Waddell, Joanne Jung Eun Choi | | Oral. 2022; 2(1): 75 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 15 |
Shear Bond Strength of a Direct Resin Composite to CAD-CAM Composite Blocks: Relative Contribution of Micromechanical and Chemical Block Surface Treatment |
|
| Vincent Fouquet, François Lachard, Sarah Abdel-Gawad, Elisabeth Dursun, Jean-Pierre Attal, Philippe François | | Materials. 2022; 15(14): 5018 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 16 |
Assessment of the Physical Properties of an Experimental Adhesive Dentin Bonding Agent with Carbon Nanoparticles |
|
| Mashael Binhasan, Khaled M Al-Habeeb, Abdullah S. Almuqbil, Tarik A. Alhaidary, Yasser F. Alfawaz, Imran Farooq, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Crystals. 2022; 12(10): 1441 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 17 |
Universal Adhesives: Evaluation of the Relationship between Bond Strength and Application Strategies—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses |
|
| Federico Triani, Lígia Pereira da Silva, Bernardo Ferreira Lemos, Joana Domingues, Liliana Teixeira, Patrícia Manarte-Monteiro | | Coatings. 2022; 12(10): 1501 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 18 |
Shear Bond Strength and Color Stability of Novel Antibacterial Nanofilled Dental Adhesive Resins |
|
| Qing Hong, Alexandra C. Pierre-Bez, Matheus Kury, Mark E. Curtis, Rochelle D. Hiers, Fernando L. Esteban Florez, John C. Mitchell | | Nanomaterials. 2022; 13(1): 1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 19 |
Effect of Bioinductive Cavity Liners on Shear Bond Strength of Dental Composite to Dentin |
|
| Saba Tohidkhah, Elham Ahmadi, Mahdi Abbasi, Reza Morvaridi Farimani, Ladan Ranjbar Omrani, Victor Feitosa | | BioMed Research International. 2022; 2022: 1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 20 |
Adhesion of Resin to Lithium Disilicate with Different Surface Treatments before and after Salivary Contamination—An In-Vitro Study |
|
| Ryan Harouny, Louis Hardan, Elie Harouny, Cynthia Kassis, Rim Bourgi, Monika Lukomska-Szymanska, Naji Kharouf, Vincent Ball, Carlos Khairallah | | Bioengineering. 2022; 9(7): 286 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 21 |
Resistencia adhesiva entre una aleación de níquel-cromo y un cemento resinoso sometidos a diferentes tratamientos de superficie |
|
| Ana Gabriela Sandoval Sandoval, Marcelo Geovanny Cascante Calderón | | Universitas Odontologica. 2022; 41 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 22 |
Effect of pretreatment with matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors on the durability of bond strength of fiber posts to radicular dentin |
|
| Kiamehr Ghazvehi, Aida Saffarpour, Sareh Habibzadeh | | Clinical and Experimental Dental Research. 2022; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 23 |
Bond strength between temporary 3D printable resin and conventional resin composite: influence of cleaning methods and air-abrasion parameters |
|
| Valerie Lankes, Marcel Reymus, Anja Liebermann, Bogna Stawarczyk | | Clinical Oral Investigations. 2022; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 24 |
Influence of mechanical and chemical pre-treatments on the repair of a hybrid ceramic |
|
| Sascha Niklas Jung, Stefan Rüttermann | | Dental Materials. 2022; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 25 |
Structural reliability and bonding performance of resin luting agents to dentin and enamel |
|
| Julia Fehrenbach, Eliseu Aldrighi Münchow, Cristina Pereira Isolan, Lucas Pradebon Brondani, César Dalmolin Bergoli | | International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives. 2021; 107: 102863 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 26 |
Effect of adhesive systems, direct resin composites and artificial aging on tensile bond strength between different resin composites and human dentin |
|
| René Steiner, Vincent Schwarz, Dagmar Schnabl, Daniel Edelhoff, Bogna Stawarczyk | | International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives. 2021; 108: 102888 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 27 |
Single-component orthodontic adhesives: comparison of the clinical and in vitro performance |
|
| Ufuk Ok, Sertac Aksakalli, Elif Eren, Nourtzan Kechagia | | Clinical Oral Investigations. 2021; 25(6): 3987 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 28 |
DIS HEKIMLIGINDE KULLANILAN BAGLANMA DAYANIMI TEST METOTLARI |
|
| M. Saygin ELMAS, Emine GÖNCÜ BASARAN, Ayça Deniz IZGI | | Atatürk Üniversitesi Dis Hekimligi Fakültesi Dergisi. 2021; : 1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 29 |
Bond Integrity of Titanium Surface to Resin Cement After Conditioning with Different Photobiomodulataion Therapy (PBT) |
|
| Khold Al Ahdal, Laila Al Deeb, Mohammed S. Bin-Shuwaish, Rana S. Al-Hamdan, Modhi Al Deeb, Ahmed M. Maawadh, Aasem M. Alhenaki, Abdulaziz AlHelal, Saad Alresayes, Khulud A. Al-Aali, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Journal of Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering. 2021; 11(5): 970 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 30 |
Impact of graphene oxide and silver diamine fluoride in comparison to photodynamic therapy on bond integrity and microleakage scores of resin modified glass ionomer cement to demineralized dentin |
|
| Yasser M. Al-Qahtani | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2021; 33: 102163 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 31 |
Push out bond strength of glass fiber post to radicular dentin irrigated with Nisin and MTAD compared to methylene blue photodynamic therapy |
|
| Abdullah S. Aljamhan, Mohammad H. Alrefeai, Alhanouf Alhabdan, Fahad Alkhudhairy, Eisha Abrar, Sarah A. Alhusseini | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2021; 34: 102304 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 32 |
Influence of adjunctive photodynamic therapy (curcumin) on the extrusion bond strength of radicular dentin to contemporary root canal sealers |
|
| Mazen F. Alkahtany, Khalid H. Almadi, Maham Sohail, Khaled M. Alzahrani, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2021; 34: 102341 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 33 |
Effect of Photodynamic therapy and Er,Cr: YSGG laser on bond strength of bleached enamel to composite resin |
|
| Fayez Hussain Niazi, Zeeshan Qamar, Syed Bilal Tanvir, Mohammed Noushad, Omar Bandar Al Dossary | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2021; 35: 102405 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 34 |
Laboratory methods for measuring adhesive bond strength between restoration materials and hard tooth tissues |
|
| I.Ya. Poyurovskaya, A.P. Polikarpova, F.S. Rusanov | | Stomatologiya. 2021; 100(5): 88 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 35 |
Adhesion between zirconia and resin cement: A critical evaluation of testing methodologies |
|
| G.R.S. Lopes, N.C. Ramos, M.T.V. Grangeiro, J.D.M. Matos, M.A. Bottino, M. Özcan, L.F. Valandro, R.M. Melo | | Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2021; 120: 104547 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 36 |
DIS HEKIMLIGINDE KULLANILAN BAGLANMA DAYANIMI TEST METOTLARI |
|
| Muhammed Saygin ELMAS, Emine GÖNCÜ BASARAN, Ayça Deniz IZGI | | Atatürk Üniversitesi Dis Hekimligi Fakültesi Dergisi. 2021; : 1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 37 |
The Effects of Amalgam Contamination and Different Surface Modifications on Dentin Shear Bond Strength When Using Different Adhesive Protocols |
|
| Nojoud Alshehri, Mohammed Bin-Shuwaish | | Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry. 2021; Volume 13: 211 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 38 |
Influence of photodynamic therapy and different lasers Er,Cr:YSGG and Er,YAG on dentin conditioning bonded to conventional and bioactive cement |
|
| Ali Alqerban, Muath Alrashed, Asma Alqerban, Ahmed Algohar, Nasser Alqhtani, Ali S Aljhani, Fahad Alharbi, Abdulaziz Samran | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2021; 33: 102107 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 39 |
Comparative Analysis of Shear Bond Strength of Composites to the Sodium Ascorbate Hydrogel-treated Bleached Enamel Surfaces: An In Vitro Analysis |
|
| Pravin Kumar, Ashish Choudhary, Arun K Patnana, Karishma Pathak, Tariq M Shekh, Pratikgiri Gosai | | International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2021; 14(6): 741 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 40 |
Evaluation of shear bond strength of various adhesives under Simulated intrapulpal pressure: An in vitro study |
|
| Sreelakshmi Pradeep, Neeta Shetty, Ravindra Kotian, Ramya Shenoy, Ishani Saluja | | Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2021; 24(2): 177 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 41 |
Micro versus Macro Shear Bond Strength Testing of Dentin-Composite Interface Using Chisel and Wireloop Loading Techniques |
|
| Ahmed M. Ismail, Christoph Bourauel, Ahmed ElBanna, Tarek Salah Eldin | | Dentistry Journal. 2021; 9(12): 140 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 42 |
An In vitro study to assess the effectiveness of the shear bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate with different adhesive systems |
|
| AbdulelahSameer Sindi | | Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences. 2021; 13(5): 672 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 43 |
Bond Integrity of Resin-modified Glass Ionomer to Dentin Conditioned Using Photodynamic Therapy and Low-level Laser Therapy: An In Vitro Study |
|
| Mohammed S Bin-Shuwaish, Abdullah S AlJamhan | | The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2021; 21(11): 1229 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 44 |
Effect of Different Surface Treatment Methods on Bond Strength of Dental Ceramics to Dental Hard Tissues: A Systematic Review |
|
| Andrzej Malysa, Joanna Wezgowiec, Sylwia Orzeszek, Wojciech Florjanski, Marek Zietek, Mieszko Wieckiewicz | | Molecules. 2021; 26(5): 1223 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 45 |
Shear Bond Strength of Veneered Zirconia Repaired Using Various Methods and Adhesive Systems: A Comparative Study |
|
| Syed Rashid Habib, Salwa Bajunaid, Abdulrahman Almansour, Abdulkarim AbuHaimed, Muqrin Nasser Almuqrin, Abdullah Alhadlaq, Muhammad Sohail Zafar | | Polymers. 2021; 13(6): 910 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 46 |
Effect of Multiple Enamel Surface Treatments on Micro-Shear Bond Strength |
|
| René Daher, Ivo Krejci, Mustapha Mekki, Charlotte Marin, Enrico Di Bella, Stefano Ardu | | Polymers. 2021; 13(20): 3589 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 47 |
Is the bond strength of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate lower than that of lithium disilicate? A systematic review and metaanalysis |
|
| Li-xian Zhang, Deng-wei Hong, Ming Zheng, Hao Yu | | Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2021; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 48 |
Evaluation of the repair capacities and color stabilities of a resin nanoceramic and hybrid CAD/CAM blocks |
|
| Hasibe Sevilay Bahadir, Yusuf Bayraktar | | The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2020; 12(3): 140 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 49 |
Influence of Hydroxyapatite Nanospheres in Dentin Adhesive on the Dentin Bond Integrity and Degree of Conversion: A Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Raman, Fourier Transform-Infrared (FTIR), and Microtensile Study |
|
| Rana S Al-Hamdan, Basil Almutairi, Hiba F Kattan, Noura A. Alsuwailem, Imran Farooq, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Polymers. 2020; 12(12): 2948 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 50 |
Dentin Bond Integrity of Hydroxyapatite Containing Resin Adhesive Enhanced with Graphene Oxide Nano-Particles—An SEM, EDX, Micro-Raman, and Microtensile Bond Strength Study |
|
| Yasser F. AlFawaz, Basil Almutairi, Hiba F Kattan, Muhammad S. Zafar, Imran Farooq, Mustafa Naseem, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Polymers. 2020; 12(12): 2978 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 51 |
Dentin Conditioning Using Different Laser Prototypes (Er,Cr:YSGG; Er:YAG) on Bond Assessment of Resinmodified Glass Ionomer Cement
|
|
| Fahad Alkhudhairy | | The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2020; 21(4): 426 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 52 |
Repair strength and surface topography of lithium disilicate and hybrid resin ceramics with LLLT and photodynamic therapy in comparison to hydrofluoric acid |
|
| Ahmed M Maawadh, Thamer Almohareb, Rana S Al-Hamdan, Modhi Al Deeb, Mustafa Naseem, Aasem M Alhenaki, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar | | Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials. 2020; 18: 2280800020 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 53 |
Does Pigment Incorporation into Regular Composite Resins for Posterior Buildups Alter Their Bond Strength? |
|
| Flaviana Alves Dias, Maria Verônica Rodrigues Conto, Ricardo Danil Guiraldo, Omar Geha, Eloisa Aparecida Carlesse Paloco, Thais Maria Freire Fernandes, Sandrine Bittencourt Berger | | Brazilian Dental Journal. 2020; 31(4): 440 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 54 |
Micro-Shear Bond Strength of Indirect Composite Resin to Three Different Computer-Milled Cores After Thermocycling |
|
| Somayeh Zeighami, Safoura Ghodsi, Naghmeh Musapoor | | Journal of Islamic Dental Association of IRAN. 2020; 32(3): 67 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 55 |
Bond assessment of resin modified glass ionomer cement to dentin conditioned with photosensitizers, laser and conventional regimes |
|
| Abdulaziz Abdullah Al-Khureif, Badreldin A. Mohamed, Abdullah M. Al-Shehri, Aftab Ahmed Khan, Darshan Devang Divakar | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2020; 30: 101795 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 56 |
Effect of different surface treatments of human occlusal sclerotic dentin on micro-tensile bond strength to resin composite core material |
|
| Anawat Kwansirikul, Daraporn Sae-Lee, Onauma Angwaravong, Thidarat Angwarawong | | European Journal of Oral Sciences. 2020; 128(3): 263 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 57 |
Assessment of the Different Types of Failure on Anterior Cantilever Resin-Bonded Fixed Dental Prostheses Fabricated with Three Different Materials: An In Vitro Study |
|
| Adolfo Di Fiore, Edoardo Stellini, Gianpaolo Savio, Stefano Rosso, Lorenzo Graiff, Stefano Granata, Carlo Monaco, Roberto Meneghello | | Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(12): 4151 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 58 |
Surface treatment of RMGIC to composite resin using different photosensitizers and lasers: A bond assessment of closed Sandwich restoration |
|
| Ahmed Ali A. Ghubaryi, Navin Ingle, Mohammed Abdul Basser | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2020; 32: 101965 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 59 |
Influence of silver diamine fluoride compared to photodynamic therapy on the bond integrity of resin modified glass ionomer cement to demineralized dentin |
|
| Abdullah Alshahrani | | Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy. 2020; 32: 102007 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 60 |
Effect of matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors on microtensile bond strength of dental composite restorations to dentin in use of an etch-and-rinse adhesive system |
|
| Aida Saffarpour, Sara Valizadeh, Abolghasem Amini, Mohammad-Javd Kharazifard, Marzieh Rohaninasab | | Clinical and Experimental Dental Research. 2020; 6(6): 686 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 61 |
The impact of non-thermal plasma on the adhesion of polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) to a veneering composite system |
|
| Younis M, Unkovskiy A, Drexler T, Qian J, Wan G, Spintzyk S | | Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2020; 112: 104065 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 62 |
Effect of the additive dentine conditioning in all-in-one adhesives on the bonding strength at simulated intrapulpal pressure |
|
| S Gerhardt-Szép, T Gerhardt, S Hasselmann, T Humpich, N Fielmann, M Giraki, S Rüttermann | | Journal of Dental Problems and Solutions. 2019; 6(1): 021 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 63 |
Ultra-high-speed videography of resin–dentin interface failure dynamics under tensile load |
|
| Keiichi Hosaka, Antonin Tichy, Masaomi Ikeda, Keiichi Nakagawa, Alireza Sadr, Junji Tagami, Masahiro Takahashi, Kento Sato, Yoshihiro Nishitani, Celso Afonso Klein-Junior, David H. Pashley, Masatoshi Nakajima | | Dental Materials. 2019; 35(7): e153 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 64 |
Evaluation of the effect of different post materials and adhesive systems on the bonding strength of short-post technique for primary teeth |
|
| Nihal Beldüz Kara, Tunahan Kanyilmaz, Soner Çankaya, Cankat Kara | | International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2018; 28(2): 239 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
