• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.105-112
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the contact angle made by 3 kinds of self etching primers (Clearfil SE Bond, AdheSE, and Tyrian) on dentin and to measure the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to dentin using these self-etching primers. Contact angle between each of 3 self etching primers and polished dentin surface was measured (n=30) by contact angle analyzer and the result was analyzed by One-way ANOVA. For the measurement of microtensile bond strength, polished dentin surface was treated with each of 3 self etching primers and dentin adhesives. Z-250 composite resin was built-up with a height of 5 mm on the adhesive-treated surface and light cured for 40s with a halogen light curing unit. Thereafter, each tooth was sectioned into slabs perpendicular to the bonded interface and trimmed (n=45). The microtensile bond strength was measured with universal testing machine and the result was analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis test. AdheSE group showed the highest contact angle followed by Clearfil SE group and Tyrian group (p<0.05). AdheSE group and Clearfil SE group showed significantly higher microtensile bond strength than Tyrian group (P<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.437-444
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal microleakage of different 2-step adhesive systems in Class V cavities prepared with different diamond points. Forty Class V cavities were prepared with two different (coarse or fine) diamond points on cervical third of extracted molars. The occlusal and gingival margin of cavities was located in enamel and dentin, respectively. They were divided into one of four equal groups (n = 10) and ; Group 1-prepared with coarse diamond point (EX-41), restored with Single Bond and Z 250, Group 2-prepared with fine diamond piont (TF-21F), restored with Sing)e Bond and Z 250, Group 3-prepared with coarse diamond point (EX-41), restored with Clearfil SE Bond and Clearfil AP-X, Group 4-prepared with fine diamond point (TF-21F), restored with Clearfil SE Bond and Clearfil AP-X. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, and bisected longitudinally. They were observed leakages at enamel and dentinal margins. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test. In this study, marginal microleakage or Single Bond was not affected by type of diamond points. But Clearfil SE Bond showed higher marginal microleakage at both enamel and dentinal margin when Class V cavity was prepared with coarse diamond point.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.148-156
• /
• 2008

Statement of problems: Self-etch adhesives exhibit some clinical benefits such as ease of manipulation and reduced technique-sensitivity. Nevertheless, some concern remains regarding the bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives to enamel, in particular when so-called 'mild' self-etch adhesives are employed. This study compared the microtensile bond strengths to ground enamel of the two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) to the three-step etch-and- rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (3M ESPE) and the one-step self-etch adhesive iBond (Heraeus Kulzer). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of a preceding phosphoric acid conditioning step on the bonding effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive to ground enamel. Material and methods: The two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond non-etch group, Clearfil SE Bond etch group with prior 35% phosphoric acid etching, and the one-step self-etch adhesive iBond group were used as experimental groups. The three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose was used as a control group. The facial surfaces of bovine incisors were divided in four equal parts cruciformly, and randomly distributed into each group. The facial surface of each incisor was ground with 800-grit silicon carbide paper. Each adhesive group was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions to ground enamel, after which the surface was built up using Light-Core (Bisco). After storage in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 1 week, the restored teeth were sectioned into enamel beams approximately 0.8*0.8mm in cross section using a low speed precision diamond saw (TOPMET Metsaw-LS). After storage in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 1 month, 3 months, microtensile bond strength evaluations were performed using microspecimens. The microtensile bond strength (MPa) was derived by dividing the imposed force (N) at time of fracture by the bond area ($mm^2$). The mode of failure at the interface was determined with a microscope (Microscope-B nocular, Nikon). The data of microtensile bond strength were statistically analyzed using a one-way ANOVA, followed by Least Significant Difference Post Hoc Test at a significance level of 5%. Results: The mean microtensile bond strength after 1 month of storage showed no statistically significant difference between all adhesive groups (P>0.05). After 3 months of storage, adhesion to ground enamel of iBond was not significantly different from Clearfil SE Bond etch (P>>0.05), while Clearfil SE Bond non-etch and Scotchbond Multi-Purpose demonstrated significantly lower bond strengths (P<0.05), with no significant differences between the two adhesives. Conclusion: In this study the microtensile bond strength to ground enamel of two-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE Bond was not significantly different from three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, and prior etching with 35% phosphoric acid significantly increased the bonding effectiveness of Clearfil SE Bond to enamel at 3 months.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.54 no.3
• /
• pp.218-225
• /
• 2016

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the push-out bond strength of glass-fiber post cemented with different adhesive systems and surface treatments. Materials and methods: 160 tooth samples made from 48 human maxillary single-rooted teeth with similar root length were divided into 4 groups according to the adhesive system (no adhesive, Adper Single Bond 2, Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil S3). Each group had 4 subgroups according to the post surface treatment methods (no treatment, sandblast, silane, sandblast and silane). Posts (Parapost Fiber White) were cemented with Rely X Unicem. The teeth were sectioned perpendicular to their long axis into 1-mm thick sections. The push-out tests was performed at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results were evaluated by 2-way ANOVA, 1-way ANOVA and multiple comparison procedures (Tukey test) (${\alpha}=0.05$). Results: Tukey test showed that the adhesive system significantly influenced the push-out strength. The Clearfil SE Bond group showed the highest value. Post surface treatments showed no significant effect. Conclusion: Bond strength of glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement using Clearfil SE Bond showed significantly higher values compared to other adhesive systems.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.327-334
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of burs on microleakage of Class V resin restorations when a self-etching primer adhesive was used. Forty Class V cavities were prepared with four different cutting burs on extracted third molars, and divided into one of four equal groups (n = 10); Group 1-plain cut carbide bur (no. 245), Group 2-cross cut carbide bur (no. 557), Group 3-fine diamond bur (TF-21F), Group 4-standard diamond bur (EX-41). The occlusal and gingival margin of cavities was located in enamel and dentin, respectively. Cavities were treated with Clearfil SE Bond and restored with Clearfil AP-X. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, and bisected longitudinally. They were observed leakages at enamel and dentinal margins. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test. The results of this study were as follows; 1. At enamel margin, microleakage of group 4 was statistically higher than those of group 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.01). 2. At dentinal margin, microleakage of group 4 was statistically higher than group 3 (p < 0.01), but group 1 and 2 were not statistically different with group 3 and 4. 3. Enamel microleakage was statistically higher than dentinal microleakage in group 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.05), but statistical difference between the microleakage of enamel and dentinal margin was not in Group 4. In conclusion, the use of coarse diamond bur showed high microleakage at both enamel and dentinal margin when Clearfil SE Bond was used in class V cavity.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.305-311
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. Over the past years, the adhesion of fiber posts luted with simplified adhesive systems has been a matter of great interest. The aim of this study was to assess the post retentive potential of a self-adhesive resin cement using different adhesive systems to compare the push-out bond strengths of fiber posts. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The post spaces of 56 mandibular premolar roots were prepared and divided into 4 experimental groups and further divided into 2 subgroups according to testing time (n=7). The fiber posts (Rely X Fiber Post) were luted with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem) and one of the following adhesive systems: no adhesive, a total-etch adhesive resin (Single Bond), a two-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil SE Bond) and a one-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil S3 Bond). Each root was cut horizontally, and 1.5 mm thick six root segments were prepared. Push-out tests were performed after one week or three months (0.5 mm/min). Statistical analysis were performed with three-way ANOVA (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. Cervical root segments showed higher bond strength values than middle segments. Adhesive application increased the bond strength. For one week group, the total-etch adhesive resin Single Bond showed higher bond strength than the self-adhesive resin cement RelyX Unicem applied without adhesive resin at middle region. For 3 months group, the two-step self-etch adhesive resin Clearfil SE Bond showed the highest bond strength for both regions. Regarding the time considered, Clearfil SE Bond 3 months group showed higher bond strength values than one week group. CONCLUSION. Using the adhesive resins in combination with the self-adhesive resin cement improves the bond strengths. The bond strength values of two-step self-etch adhesive resin Clearfil SE Bond improved as time passes.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.81-90
• /
• 2011

In this study, we observed the penetration of the resin infiltrant into natural initial caries by SEM and CLSM, evaluated the pH and viscosity of resin infiltrant and several adhesives(All-bond 2, Scotchbond Multi-purpose, Clearfil SE bond), and measured the surface roughness and the microhardness on permanent teeth before and after applied resin infiltrant into initial enamel caries. The viscosity(Pa.s) was observed for resin infiltrant($0.173{\pm}0.012$), All-bond 2($0.754{\pm}0.030$), Scotchbond Multi-purpose($1.46{\pm}0.137$), and Clearfil SE bond($1.28{\pm}0.125$). The pH was measured for resin infiltrant (4.7), All-bond 2(7.5), Scotchbond Multi-purpose(8.2), and Clearfil SE bond(4.67). An application procedure of resin infiltrant increased the surface roughness and the microhardness insignificantly(p>0.05), when compared to non-applied specimens.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.420-429
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to compare the micro ensile bond strength to bovine dentin of several adhesives (SM, Scotch $Bond^{TM}$ Multipurpose; SB, $Adper^{TM}$ Single Bond 2; SE, $Clearfil^{(R)}$ SE Bond; AQ, AQ $Bond^{TM}$; TS, $Clearfil^{(R)}$ tri-S Bond). Except SM and SB, they have a simplified one- or two-step application protocols in compare with the dentin adhesives conventional three-step protocols. For the microtensile bond strength test, the labial surfaces of bovine incisors were used. Following exposure of dentin layer, according to their manufacturer's directions, each dentin adhesives were applied and composite resin blocks were constructed. The teeth were sectioned for specimen and tested microtensile bond strength. Also observed the fracture mode of interface. The obtained results were as follows : 1. The microtensile bond strength values ranged from 51.34 to 24.04 MPa on dentin(in decreasing order, SE, SM, SB, AQ and TS). 2. The highest microtensile bond strength was by SE and SM on bovine dentin, and the lowest by AQ and TS. 3. SM, SB and SE showed cohesive failures and adhesive failure but AQ, TS presented almost adhesive failures. In summary, microtensile bond strengths of single-step adhesives (AQ and TS) on bovine dentin were significantly lower than those of multi-step adhesives (SM, SB and SE) (p<0.05).

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.285-291
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of collagenase and esterase on the microtensile bond $strength({\mu}TBS)$ in dentin bonding. After resin composites were bonded to occlusal dentin. ${\mu}TBS$ specimens were formed and stored in PBS, collagenase, or esterase solution After 4-week storage, ${\mu}TBS$ was determined and, the results were as follows : 1. ${\mu}TBS$ values of Single Bond 2 were lower than those of Clearfil SE Bond for all storage medium (p<0.05). 2. In Single Bond 2 group, collagenase solution lowered bond strength more than PBS and esterase solution (p>0.05). 3. In Clearfil SE Bond group, esterase solution lowered bond strength more than PBS(p>0.05). Collagenase solution lowered bond strength more than esterase solution(p>0.05) and PBS(p<0.05).

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.36 no.6
• /
• pp.477-482
• /
• 2011

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the microshear bond strength (uSBS) to enamel prepared with different burs and to determine what type of bur were chosen when a self-etching primer adhesive was used. Materials and Methods: Enamel of forty-two human molars were used. They were divided into one of six groups (n = 7), Group 1, coarse (125 - 150 ${\mu}m$) diamond bur; Group 2, standard (106 - 125 ${\mu}m$) diamond bur; Group 3, fine (53 - 63 ${\mu}m$) diamond bur; Group 4, extrafine (20 - 30 ${\mu}m$) diamond bur; Group 5, plaincut carbide bur (no. 245); Group 6, cross-cut carbide bur (no. 557). Clearfil SE Bond and Clearfil AP-X (Kuraray Medical Inc.) was bonded to enamel surface. The bonded specimens were subjected to uSBS testing. Results: The uSBS of Group 4 was the highest among groups and it was significantly higher than that of Groups 1, 2, 3, and 6 (p < 0.05), but it was not significantly different from that of Group 5. Conclusions: Different burs used on enamel surface affected the microshear bond strengths of a self-etching primer adhesive to the enamel surface. In the case of Clearfil SE Bond, extrafine diamond and plain-cut carbide bur are recommended for bonding to enamel.