Reference : An in vitro evaluation of leakage of two Etch and Rinse and two Self-Etch adhesives aft...
Scientific journals : Article
Human health sciences : Dentistry & oral medicine
http://hdl.handle.net/2268/121010
An in vitro evaluation of leakage of two Etch and Rinse and two Self-Etch adhesives after thermocycling
English
Geerts, Sabine mailto [Université de Liège - ULg > Département de science dentaire > Dentisterie conservatrice de l'adulte - Occlusodontie >]
BOLETTE, Amandine mailto [Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Institut de dentisterie - conservatrice de l'adulte >]
SEIDEL, Laurence mailto [Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Non budgétaires >]
Gueders, Audrey mailto [Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > > Institut de dentisterie - conservatrice de l'adulte >]
2012
International Journal of Dentistry [=IJD]
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Yes (verified by ORBi)
International
1687-8728
[en] adhesive systems ; thermocycling ; microleakage
[en] Our experiment evaluated the microleakage in resin composite restorations bonded to dental
tissues with different adhesive systems. 40 class V cavities were prepared on the facial and
lingual surfaces of each tooth with coronal margins in enamel and apical margins in
cementum (root dentin). The teeth were restored with Z100 resin composite bonded with
different adhesive systems: Scotchbond! Multipurpose (SBMP) a 3-step Etch and Rinse
adhesive, Adper! Scotchbond! 1 XT (SB1) a 2-step Etch and Rinse adhesive, AdheSE®
One (ADSE-1) a 1-step Self-Etch adhesive and AdheSE® (ADSE) a 2-step Self-Etch
adhesive. Teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 50 % silver nitrate solution.
When both interfaces were considered, SBMP has exhibited significantly less microleakage
than other adhesive systems (respectively for SB1, ADSE-1 and ADSE, p = 0.0007, p <
0.0001 and p < 0.0001). When enamel and dentin interfaces were evaluated separately: 1)
for the Self-Etch adhesives, microleakage was found greater at enamel than at dentin
interfaces (for ADSE, p = 0.024 and for ADSE-1, p < 0.0001); 2) for the Etch and Rinse
adhesive systems, there was no significant difference between enamel and dentin interfaces;
3) SBMP was found significantly better than other adhesives both at enamel and dentin
interfaces.
In our experiment Etch and Rinse adhesives remain better than Self-Etch adhesives at
enamel interface. In addition, there was no statistical difference between 1-step (ADSE-1)
and 2-step (ADSE) Self-Etch adhesives.
http://hdl.handle.net/2268/121010

File(s) associated to this reference

Fulltext file(s):

FileCommentaryVersionSizeAccess
Restricted access
Preprint 852841.v2-2.pdfAuthor preprint1.43 MBRequest copy

Bookmark and Share SFX Query

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.