Short communication: pre- and co-curing effect of adhesives on shear bond strengths of composite resins to primary enamel and dentine: an in vitro study

Effects of Thermocycling with Two Different Curing Techniques on Enamel Micro-Cracks Formation, Debonding, and Failure Modes of Ceramic Brackets: An In Vitro Study

Despite the rise in popularity of ceramic braces for adults, the risk of enamel microcracks (EMCs) upon removal remains a significant drawback for both dental professionals and patients. Our study aimed to assess the effects of thermocycling, pre-curing, and co-curing techniques with different bonding agents on the enamel surface of teeth after the removal of ceramic brackets. We also examined the incidence, quantity, length, and direction of EMCs on tooth surfaces. Additionally, the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores and orthodontic bracket bond failure modes were evaluated and compared. The study divided 40 extracted upper canine teeth into ten groups for further analysis. Two groups had intact enamel as the negative control, while the remaining groups had orthodontic ceramic brackets bonded using different bonding agents and curing techniques. Thermocycling was performed in five groups, and ARI was assessed after debonding. The study findings were statistically significant (p < 0.05) in demonstrating the impact of curing techniques on EMCs and debonding outcomes. Seventh-generation bonding agents resulted in complete adhesive removal (ARI = 0). The microcracks' incidence, number, and length showed insignificant results. Differences in ARI between thermocycler and non-thermocycler samples were insignificant. Both co-curing and pre-curing techniques yielded comparable ARI results. This study highlights the importance of using advanced bonding agents to minimize enamel damage during ceramic bracket debonding.

Blue Laser for Polymerization of Bulk Fill Composites: Influence on dentin bond strength and temperature rise during curing and co-curing method

Blue diode lasers are alternative curing devices for dental composites. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of blue diode laser polymerization on shear bond strength of bulk fill composites to human dentin and temperature rise during two types of polymerization. Composite cylinders of SDR Plus(SDR) and Ever X Flow(EX) were bonded to dentin slabs using Adhese Universal and curing devices blue diode laser (449 nm, 1.6 W) and Power Cure LED. For each material and curing device there were two polymerization approaches: 1)conventional: separate curing of adhesive; 2)co-curing: simultaneous adhesive and composite curing. Polymerization modes for each material in conventional and co-curing(c) approach were: blue laser 2000 mW/cm2 for 5 s (L5 and L5c); blue laser 1000 mW/cm2 for 10 s (L10 and L10c); Power Cure 2000 mW/cm2 for 5 s (LED5 and LED5c); Power Cure 1000 mW/cm2 for 10 s (LED10 and LED10c). Temeperature was measured using thermal vision camera. For SDR, the highest bond strength was 24.3 MPa in L10c, and the lowest 9.2 MPa in LED5c. EX exhibited the highest bond strength(21.3 MPa) in LED5, and the lowest in L5(7.7 MPa). The highest temperature rise for SDR was in L10 and L5 (7.3 and 7.2 °C), and the lowest in LED5(0.8 °C). For EX, the highest temperature rise was in L5 (13.0 °C), and the lowest in LED5 (0.7 °C). Temperature rise was higher during blue laser polymerization, especially at high intensity and with conventional curing. Preferable blue laser curing mode is co-curing at 1000mW/cm2 for 10 s.

Comparative Assessment of Different Pre-Treatment Bonding Strategies to Improve the Adhesion of Self-Adhesive Composites to Dentin

The aim of this study is to compare the adhesive interface formed in dentin, using self-adhesive composites applied with different bonding strategies, by testing the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) and ultramorphology through the use of light microscopy. Permanent, sound human molars were randomly allocated to six experimental groups. The groups included a negative control group, where only etching was performed via EtchOnly; a positive control group where an adhesive was applied, OptiBondFL (OBFL); and an experimental group where a primer was applied using a co-curing strategy together with a composite (Primer_CoCuring). The samples were sectioned into microspecimens for μTBS (n = 8) and into 1-mm thick slabs for light microscopy using Masson’s trichrome staining protocol (n = 3). The statistical analysis included a two-way ANOVA for μTBS data and Tukey’s HSD was used as a post-hoc test (significance level of 5%; SPSS v. 26.0). The results of the μTBS revealed that the self-adhesive composite (F = 6.0, p < 0.018) and the bonding strategy (F = 444.1, p < 0.001) significantly affected the bond strength to dentin. However, their interactions were not significant (F = 1.2, p = 0.29). Etching dentin with no additional treatment revealed the lowest μTBS (VF_EtchOnly = 2.4 ± 0.8 MPa; CC_EtchOnly = 2.0 ± 0.4 MPa), which was significantly different from using a primer (VF_CoCu = 8.8 ± 0.8 MPa; CC_CoCu = 6.3 ± 1.0 MPa) or using the full adhesive (VF_OptiBondFL = 22.4 ± 0.3 MPa; CC_OptibondFL = 21.2 ± 0.4 MPa). Microscopy images revealed that the experimental Primer_CoCuring was the only group with no collagen fibers exposed to the dentin−composite interface. Overall, the use of a primer, within the limitations of this study, increased the bonding of the self-adhesive composite and provided sufficient infiltration of the collagen based on light-microscopic imaging.

Influence of Primer Pre-curing and Co-curing on Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Using Three Light-cure Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets with primer pre-curing and co-curing using three light cure adhesive systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this in vitro study, 102 extracted premolar teeth mounted on self-cure acrylic resin blocks were separated into six groups based on primer pre-curing and co-curing with each group receiving stainless steel orthodontic premolar brackets bonded to the buccal surfaces. The following adhesives were used: Transbond XT (3M Unitek, CA, USA), Orthofix (Anabond Stedman, India), and Enlight (Ormco, India). In the groups with pre-curing, the primer was pre-cured for 20 seconds while in the groups with co-curing, the primer and adhesive were cured together. Shear bond strength tests and Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) were assessed followed by an scanning electron microscope (SEM) view (×3000) of the enamel surface after debonding. Statistical analysis was done using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test.

RESULTS

The descriptive statistics in the pre-cured groups showed a statistically significant difference. The highest mean SBS was observed for group I, i.e., Transbond XT with primer pre-curing (20.56 ± 3.22 MPa). The lowest mean SBS was for group IV, i.e., Orthofix with primer co-curing (7.57 + 0.49 MPa). The results of ANOVA revealed a significant difference among the groups. The ARI scoring and the SEM analysis also confirmed this finding.

CONCLUSION

Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets with primer pre-curing showed a better bond strength than brackets with co-curing. The ARI data suggested that the majority of bracket failure happened at the resin-bracket interface. Scanning electron microscope analysis also confirmed the ARI and SBS findings.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

During the bonding of orthodontic brackets, the primer can be co-cured where the primer and adhesive resin are cured simultaneously or pre-cured where the primer is cured separately. Most orthodontic clinicians to save time co-cure primer. Both these methods affect the SBS of brackets.

Effect of Conventional Adhesive Application or Co-Curing Technique on Dentin Bond Strength

The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the effect of two different adhesive application methods on shear dentin bond strength (ISO 29022) using three various adhesive systems. A mid-coronal section of 77 intact third human molars with fully developed apices was made to create flat bonding substrates. The materials used in the study were Excite F (Ivoclar Vivadent), Prime&Bond Universal (Dentsply Sirona) and G-Premio Bond (GC). The application of each adhesion system was performed in two different ways. In the first group, the bonding agent was light cured immediately after the application (conventional method), while in the second group the adhesive and composite were cured concurrently (“co-curing” method). A total of 180 specimens were prepared (3 adhesives × 2 method of application × 30 specimens per experimental group), stored at 37 °C in distilled water and fractured in shear mode after 1 week. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Weibull statistics. The highest bond strength was obtained for Prime&Bond conventional (21.7 MPa), whilst the lowest bond strength was observed when co-curing was used (particularly, Excite F 12.2 MPa). The results showed a significant difference between conventional and co-curing methods in all materials. According to reliability analysis, the co-curing method diminished bond reliability. Different application techniques exhibit different bond strengths to dentin.

Influence of adhesive-composite application modalities on their bonding to tooth structure and resistance of the performed restorations to failure

Background/purpose

The longevity of bonded composite restorations could be affected by the utilized adhesive-composite application techniques. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the influence of adhesive-composite application modalities on their bonding values to tooth structure and on the failure resistance of the performed restorations on loading.

Materials and methods

Resin composite studs, 2 mm in diameter and 4 mm high, were bonded in 2 groups to flattened enamel and dentin surfaces of 80 extracted premolars using pre-cured (PC) and co-cured (CC) self-etch resin adhesive. Studs in each group were built-up in 4 subgroups using either multiple increments of nano-filled composite (IF, control) or single increment of preheated nano-filled (PH), bulk-fill (BF) and sonic-activated bulk-fill composites (SF). Another 80 premolars with standard class II cavities were also restored using the same adhesive-composite application modalities. All specimens were then stressed on a universal testing machine to assess the composite-tooth shear bond strength and the resistance of the performed restorations to failure. The modes of specimens’ failure were also assessed following each test.

Results

The PC adhesive provided higher bond strength to dentin (p < 0.05) and comparable bond strength to enamel in comparison to the CC one (p>0.05%). Both PH and BF composites showed lower bond strength to dentin in presence of PC adhesive (p < 0.05). Comparable bond strengths were noticed for PH, BF and SF composites to dentin in presence of CC adhesive (p > 0.05). PH and SF restorations presented the highest resistance to failure (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Both incrementally and bulky-inserted composites offer clinically acceptable bond strength in presence of pre-cured resin adhesive. Both Preheated and sonic-activated composite restorations offer the highest resistance to failure on loading. The preheating procedure renders regular composite material suitable for bulk-fill applications.

Adhesive systems for restoring primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies

AIM

To systematically review the literature for in vitro studies that evaluated the immediate or after ageing bond strength of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems to enamel and dentin of primary teeth.

DESIGN

The search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane, SciELO, Lilacs, and Scopus databases with no publication year or language limits, following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. From 459 potentially eligible studies, 39 were selected for full-text analysis, and 5 were identified in reference lists, with 36 considered in the meta-analysis. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Pooling bond strength data was calculated using random effects analysis method, comparing two categories of adhesives (etch-and-rinse versus self-etch systems) when applied in different types and conditions of substrate (α  =  0.05).

RESULTS

No statistical significant difference in bond strength between both categories was observed in caries-affected dentin at immediate evaluation and in sound dentin after ageing. Etch-and-rinse adhesives, however, performed better in sound enamel and dentin substrates considering immediate bond strength. None study assessed the long-term adhesive effectiveness to sound or demineralized enamel.

CONCLUSION

Although the articles included in this meta-analysis showed high heterogeneity and high risk of bias, the in vitro literature suggests superior performance of etch-and-rinse adhesives in primary teeth in comparison with self-etch systems.