Üniversal adezivlerin dentine mikro-gerilim baðlanma dayanýmlarýnýn deðerlendirilmesi

GÝRÝÞ ve AMAÇ: Bu çalýþmanýn amacý beþ farklý üniversal adezivin iki farklý uygulama modunda (etch&rinse ve self-etch) dentine mikro-gerilim bağlanma dayanýmlarýný μTBS altýn standart olarak kabul edilen üç basamaklý bir etch&rinse adeziv ve iki basamaklý bir self-etch adeziv ile karþýlaþtýrmaktýr.
YÖNTEM ve GEREÇLER: Otuz altý adet çürüksüz insan üçü ncü molar diþi rastgele olarak 12 gruba ayrýldý (n=3). Her gruptaki diþlerin oklüzal minesi su soðutmasý altýnda aþýndýrýldý ve dentin yüzeyindeki smear tabakasý su soðutmasý altýnda 600 grit SiC zýmpara ile standardize edildi. Üniversal adezivler üretici firmalarýn talimatlarý doðrultusunda; Clearfil Universal Bond, self-etch [CUSe] ve etch&rinse [CUEr]; Single Bond Universal, self-etch [SUSe], etch&rinse [SUEr]; All-Bond Universal, self-etch [AlSe], etch&rinse [AlEr]; iBond Universal, self-etch [iBSe], etch&rinse [iBEr]; G-Premio Bond Universal, self-etch [GPSe], etch&rinse [GPEr] olarak uygulandý. Etch&rinse için Optibond FL [OFL], self-etch için ise Clearfil SE Bond [CSE] kontrol grubu olarak kullanýldý. Adeziv uygulamasýndan sonra diþlerin oklüzal yüzeylerinde rezin kompozit (Filtek Z250; A2) ile 5mm kalýnlýkta built-up yapýldý, örnekler 24 saat 37 0C’de bekletildi ve 1 mm2 dentin-kompozit çubuklarýna ayrýlarak (Isomet) universal test cihazýnda mikro-gerilim testine (MPa; n: 20; 0.5mm/ dk) tabii tutuldu. Veriler two-way ANOVA ve post-hoc Tukey testleri kullanýlarak analiz edildi (p<0.05).
BULGULAR: Ayný adezivin farklý uygulama modlarý karþýlaþtýrýldýðýnda, GPEr, iBEr ve AlEr ile elde edilen μTBS deðerleri GPSe, iBSe ve AlSe’den istatistiksel olarak anlamlý derecede yüksek bulundu (p<0,05). CUEr ve CUSe ile SUEr ve SUSe arasýnda ise istatistiksel olarak anlamlý fark saptanmadý (p>0,05). Adezivler etch&rinse modunda birbirleriyle karþýlaþtýrýldýðýnda, istatistiksel olarak en yüksek μTBS deðeri kontrol grubu OFL ile elde edildi (p<0,05), GPEr, iBEr ve SUEr arasýnda istatiksel olarak anlamlý fark bulunmadý (p>0,05) ve istatistiksel olarak en düþük deðerler AlEr ve CUEr ile saptandý (p<0,05). Adezivler self-etch uygulama modunda karþýlaþtýrýldýðýnda, istatistiksel olarak en yüksek μTBS CUSe, SUSe ve GPSe ile elde edildi (p<0,05) ve kontrol grubu CSE ile aralarýnda istatistiksel olarak anlamlý fark bulunmadý (p>0,05).
TARTIÞMA ve SONUÇ: Üniversal adezivlerin dentine baðlanma performanslarý kullanýlan materyale ve seçilen uygulama moduna baðlýdýr. Altýn standart olarak kabul edilen üç basamaklý etch&rinse adeziv sistemi ile en yüksek baðlanma deðerleri elde edilmiþtir, ancak farklý üniversal adezivlerin her iki uygulama modu da altin standart olarak kabul edilen iki basamaklý self-etch adeziv sistemi ile benzer baðlanma dayanýmý göstermiþtir.

Microtensile bond strength evaluation of universal adhesives to dentine

INTRODUCTION: To compare the microtensile bond strengths (μTBS) of five universal adhesives applied in two different etching modes (etch&rinse and self-etch) with a reference gold standard three-step etch&rinse and a two-step self-etch adhesive.
METHODS: 36 non-carious human third molars were divided into 12 groups (n=3) randomly. The occlusal enamel were removed and smear layer on the mid coronal dentin surfaces were created using 600 SIC paper under running water. Clearfil Universal Bond, self-etch [CUSe] and etch&rinse [CUEr]; Single Bond Universal, self- etch [SUSe] and etch&rinse [SUEr]; All-Bond Universal, self-etch [AlSe] and etch&rinse [AlEr]; iBond Universal, self- etch [iBSe] and etch&rinse [iBEr]; G-Premio Bond Universal self-etch [GPSe] and etch&rinse [GPEr] were applied according to their manufacturer’s instructions. Optibond FL [OFL] was applied as etch&rinse control group whereas Clearfil SE Bond [CSE] was used as self-etch control. After adhesive application 5 mm composite (Filtek Z250; A2) build ups were performed then specimens were stored in water (370C/24 h) and sectioned into 1mm2 sticks and microtensile test (MPa; n=20; 0.5 mm/min) was performed using an universal testing machine (Instron). Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey’s tests (p <0.05).
RESULTS: Comparing different application modes of the same adhesive, statistically significant higher μTBS were found in GPEr, iBEr and AlEr than GPSe, iBSe and AlSe groups (p <0.05). There were no statistically significant differences were between CUEr and CUSe, SUEr and SUSe (p> 0.05). When adhesives compared to each other in etch&rinse mode; OFL yielded statistically significant highest μTBS (p<0.05) while no statistically significant differences were found between GPEr, iBEr and SUEr (p>0,05) and statistically the lowest values were observed in AlEr and CUEr (p<0.05). When adhesives compared to each other in self-etch mode; statistically highest μTBS was observed in CUSe, SUSe and GPSe (p<0.05) and no statistically significant differences were found with the control group CSE (p>0.05).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Bonding performance of universal adhesives were material and etching mode-dependent. The gold standard three-step etch&rinse adhesive showed the highest μTBS overall the adhesives regardless of etching modes, while two universal adhesive showed similar μTBS with the reference gold standart two-step self-etch adhesive.