The Influence of Application Protocol of Simplified and Universal Adhesives on the Dentin Bonding Performance

The Classification and Selection of Adhesive Agents; an Overview for the General Dentist

Adhesive agents are essential to most restorative procedures used in everyday practice. Depending on the clinical situation, the dentist will choose among a rapidly evolving variety of adhesive agents (bonding agents). Due to the availability of many adhesive agents, appropriate selection can take time and effort. Typically, a practitioner relies more on marketing and experience than in-depth material knowledge. The classification of adhesive agents may need to be clarified and easier to remember due to its lack of relevance to clinical procedures. This paper reviews the published literature retrieved from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus by using specific keywords "adhesive agents", "classification", "dentin", "enamel", "universal", "self-etch", "etch-and-rinse", and "bonding". The titles and abstracts were screened, and the relevant literature was retrieved. The list of references from each identified article was examined to find other potentially relevant articles. Adhesive agents can be classified as etch-and-rinse, self-etch, or "multi-mode" according to their approach to interacting with the smear layer, and each approach can be further classified according to the number of clinical steps required during application. This article reviews the classification of current adhesive agents and discusses the properties that make a specific adhesive agent the optimal choice for a particular clinical indication. The review will assist the general dentist in understanding the various types of available adhesive agents and how they function. Overall, the review will facilitate decision-making and allow the selection of appropriate materials.

Effect of Different Application Modalities on the Bonding Performance of Adhesive Systems to Dentin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Diverse types of dental adhesives exhibit different cytotoxic outcomes on cells in vitro. Currently, no standard adhesive application technique has so far been decisive for clinicians for better durability of resin-dentin bonds of adhesive systems. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the bonding performance of adhesive systems to dentin by using different application modalities. The systematic research strategy was conducted by two reviewers among multiple databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Scielo. In vitro studies reporting the effects of additional steps for the application of adhesive systems on the bond strength to dentin were selected. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software version 5.3.5 using the random effects model. The methodological quality of each in vitro study was assessed according to the parameters of a previous systematic review. The electronic research through different databases generated a total of 8318 references. After the examination of titles and abstracts, a total of 106 potentially relevant studies accessed the full-text evaluation phase. After full-text examination, 78 publications were included for the qualitative analysis, and 68 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding the etch-and-rinse adhesive systems, the application modalities that improved the overall bond strength were the application of a hydrophobic resin layer (p = 0.005), an extended application time (p < 0.001), an application assisted by an electric current (p < 0.001), a double-layer application (p = 0.05), the agitation technique (p = 0.02), and the active application of the adhesive (p < 0.001). For self-etch adhesive systems, the techniques that improved the overall bond strength were the application of a hydrophobic resin layer (p < 0.001), an extended application time (p = 0.001), an application assisted by an electric current (p < 0.001), a double-layer application (p < 0.001), the agitation technique (p = 0.01), and the active application of the adhesive (p < 0.001). The in vitro evidence suggests that the application of adhesive systems using alternative techniques or additional strategies may be beneficial for improving their bond strength to dentin. The application modalities that favored the overall bond strength to dentin were an extended application time, a double-layer application, an application assisted by an electric current, the active application of the adhesive, and the application of a hydrophobic resin layer. Worth mentioning is that some techniques are intended to increase the degree of the conversion of the materials, and therefore, improvements in the biocompatibility of the materials can be expected.

Bonding of universal adhesives to bur-cut dentin: Effect of double application and dentin moisture level

This study investigated how the double application of adhesives and dentin moisture level influence the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of universal adhesives containing different hydrophilic monomers to bur-cut dentin. Four universal adhesives (Scotchbond Universal, Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, Prime&Bond Universal, BeautiBond Universal) were applied to wet and dry bur-cut dentin either in one or two layers. The µTBS test was performed after 25,000 thermal cycles, and scanning electron microscopy was used for the analysis of failure mode and interfacial ultrastructure. Double application significantly improved µTBS on wet dentin (p<0.001), but the effect was not significant on dry dentin (p>0.050). Double application also enhanced the formation of resin tags and limited voids within the adhesive layer of BeautiBond Universal. Dentin moisture had a significant effect on µTBS only if the adhesives were applied in a single layer (p=0.007). Except for Prime&Bond Universal, the tested universal adhesives performed better on dry dentin.

Effects of different universal adhesives and surface treatments on repair bond strength between resin composites

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different universal adhesives and surface treatments on the repair bond strength between resin composites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 220 composite samples were divided into three groups according to the adhesive resin to be applied: 1) Scotchbond Universal, 2) G-Premio Bond, and 3) Peak Universal Bond. They were then divided into seven subgroups according to surface treatments (n = 10): A) air abrasion, B) air abrasion+silane, C) hydrofluoric acid, D) hydrofluoric acid+silane, E) air abrasion+hydrofluoric acid+silane, F) silane, and G) no surface treatment (negative control). After surface treatment, a repair composite was applied. Samples aged in the thermocycle were subjected to micro-tensile bond strength testing. Cohesive strength values of 10 non-aged composite blocks were used as a positive control. Kruskal-Wallis and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical evaluation. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a scanning electron microscope.

RESULTS

In Scotchbond Universal and G-Premio Bond, the mean micro-tensile bond strength value of the no surface treatment subgroup was significantly lower than that of the positive control. All subgroups of Peak Universal Bond showed similar values to the positive control.

CONCLUSION

While Scotchbond Universal and G-Premio Bond required mechanical roughening before adhesive application, Peak Universal Bond did not require any surface treatment.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Different universal adhesives may show different repair bonding strengths with different surface treatments. Since achieving a standard in this regard can be associated with many independent factors, clinicians should determine how to apply the adhesive they use most effectively with the most appropriate surface treatment based on their own clinical experience.

The Toxicity of Universal Dental Adhesives: An In Vitro Study

There is no consensus in the literature regarding the potential toxicity of universal dental adhesives (UDA). Being used in close proximity to the pulp, their biocompatibility should be an important factor in dental research. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of UDA in an in vitro model. The study was performed using a monocyte/macrophage peripheral blood SC cell line (ATCC CRL-9855) on four specific UDA, namely: All-Bond Universal (Bisco); CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick (Kuraray); G-Premio BOND (GC); Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE). The cytotoxicity of the investigated UDA was measured using the XTT colorimetric assay. The genotoxicity of the analyzed compounds was evaluated using an alkaline version of the comet assay. Furthermore, flow cytometry (FC) apoptosis detection was performed using the FITC Annexin V Apoptosis Detection Kit I. FC cell-cycle arrest assessment was performed using propidium iodide staining. The study observed significant differences in the toxicity of the UDA that were tested, as G-Premio BOND showed significant in vitro toxicity in all of the tests performed, while All-Bond Universal, CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick and Single Bond Universal did not present any significant toxic effects toward SC cell line. The in vitro toxicity of UDA should be taken into consideration prior to in vivo and clinical studies. The flow cytometry could improve the accuracy of dental materials research and should be incorporated into the standardization criteria.

Bond Strength of Universal Adhesives to Dentin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Currently, the availability of a wide variety of universal adhesives makes it difficult for clinicians to choose the correct system for specific bonding situations to dentin substrate. This study aimed to determine whether there are any alternative techniques or additional strategies available to enhance the bond strength of universal adhesives to dentin through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Two reviewers executed a literature search up to September 2020 in four electronic databases: PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE. Only in vitro studies that reported the dentin bond strength of universal adhesives using additional strategies were included. An analysis was carried out using Review Manager Software version 5.3.5 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). The methodological quality of each in vitro study was assessed according to the parameters of a previous systematic. A total of 5671 potentially relevant studies were identified. After title and abstract examination, 74 studies remained in systematic review. From these, a total of 61 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The bond strength of universal adhesives to dentin was improved by the use of one of the following techniques: Previous application of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP) inhibitors (p < 0.001), prolonged application time (p = 0.007), scrubbing technique (p < 0.001), selective dentin etching (p < 0.001), non-atmospheric plasma (p = 0.01), ethanol-wet bonding (p < 0.01), prolonged blowing time (p = 0.02), multiple layer application (p = 0.005), prolonged curing time (p = 0.006), and hydrophobic layer coating (p < 0.001). On the other hand, the use of a shortened application time (p = 0.006), and dentin desensitizers (p = 0.01) impaired the bond strength of universal adhesives to dentin. Most of the analyses performed showed a high heterogenicity. The in vitro evidence suggests that the application of universal adhesives using some alternative techniques or additional strategies may be beneficial for improving their bonding performance to dentin. This research received no external funding. Considering that this systematic review was carried out only with in vitro studies, registration was not performed.

Reinforced Universal Adhesive by Ribose Crosslinker: A Novel Strategy in Adhesive Dentistry

Enzymatic biodegradation of demineralized collagen fibrils could lead to the reduction of resin-dentin bond strength. Therefore, methods that provide protection to collagen fibrils appear to be a pragmatic solution to improve bond strength. Thus, the study's aim was to investigate the effect of ribose (RB) on demineralized resin-dentin specimens in a modified universal adhesive. Dentin specimens were obtained, standardized and then bonded in vitro with a commercial multi-mode adhesive modified with 0, 0.5%, 1%, and 2% RB, restored with resin composite, and tested for micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) after storage for 24 h in artificial saliva. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed to analyze resin-dentin interface. Contact angles were analyzed using a contact angle analyzer. Depth of penetration of adhesives and nanoleakage were assessed using micro-Raman spectroscopy and silver tracing. Molecular docking studies were carried out using Schrodinger small-molecule drug discovery suite 2019-4. Matrix metalloproteinases-2 (MMP-2) and cathepsin-K activities in RB-treated specimens were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The significance level was set at α = 0.05 for all statistical analyses. Incorporation of RB at 1% or 2% is of significant potential (p < 0.05) as it can be associated with improved wettability on dentin surfaces (0.5% had the lowest contact angle) as well as appreciable hybrid layer quality, and higher resin penetration. Improvement of the adhesive bond strength was shown when adding RB at 1% concentration to universal adhesive (p < 0.05). Modified adhesive increased the resistance of collagen degradation by inhibiting MMP-2 and cathepsin-K. A higher RB concentration was associated with improved results (p < 0.01). D-ribose showed favorable negative binding to collagen. In conclusion, universal adhesive using 1% or 2% RB helped in maintaining dentin collagen scaffold and proved to be successful in improving wettability, protease inhibition, and stability of demineralized dentin substrates. A more favorable substrate is created which, in turn, leads to a more stable dentin-adhesive bond. This could lead to more advantageous outcomes in a clinical scenario where a stable bond may result in longevity of the dental restoration.

Effect of Over-Etching and Prolonged Application Time of a Universal Adhesive on Dentin Bond Strength

This study investigated the effect of over-etching and prolonged application time of a universal adhesive on dentin bond strength. Ninety extracted human molars were ground to dentin and randomly allocated into nine groups (G1-9; n = 10 per group), according to the following acid etching and adhesive application times. In the control group (G1), phosphoric acid etching was performed for 15 s followed by application of the universal adhesive Scotchbond Universal (3M) for 20 s, as per manufacturer's instructions. In groups G2-5, both the etching and adhesive application times were either halved, doubled, quadrupled, or increased eightfold. In groups G6-9, etching times remained the same as in G2-5 (7.5 s, 30 s, 60 s, and 120 s, respectively), but the adhesive application time was set at 20 s as in the control group (G1). Specimens were then restored with a nanofilled composite material and subjected to microtensile bond strength testing. Bond strength data were statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests (α = 0.05). The relationship of bond strength with etching and adhesive application time was examined using linear regression analysis. Treatment of dentin with halved phosphoric acid etching and adhesive application times (G2) resulted in a significant bond strength decrease compared to the control group (G1) and all other test groups, including the group with halved acid etching, but 20 s of adhesive application time (G6). No significant differences in bond strength were found for groups with multiplied etching times and an adhesive application time of 20 s or more, when compared to the control group (G1). In conclusion, a universal adhesive application time of at least 20 s is recommended when bonding to over-etched dentin.

Clinical Effectiveness of Bulk-Fill and Conventional Resin Composite Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the clinical effectiveness of bulk-fill and conventional resin in composite restorations. A bibliographic search was carried out until May 2020, in the biomedical databases Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL and Web of Science. The study selection criteria were: randomized clinical trials, in English, with no time limit, with a follow-up greater than or equal to 6 months and that reported the clinical effects (absence of fractures, absence of discoloration or marginal staining, adequate adaptation marginal, absence of post-operative sensitivity, absence of secondary caries, adequate color stability and translucency, proper surface texture, proper anatomical form, adequate tooth integrity without wear, adequate restoration integrity, proper occlusion, absence of inflammation and adequate point of contact) of restorations made with conventional and bulk resins. The risk of bias of the study was analyzed using the Cochrane Manual of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Sixteen articles were eligible and included in the study. The results indicated that there is no difference between restorations with conventional and bulk resins for the type of restoration, type of tooth restored and restoration technique used. However, further properly designed clinical studies are required in order to reach a better conclusion.

The Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity of Three Dental Universal Adhesives-An In Vitro Study

Dental universal adhesives are considered an useful tool in modern dentistry as they can be used in different etching techniques, allow for simplified protocol and provide sufficient bond strength. However, there is still no consensus as to their toxicity towards pulp. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of three universal adhesives: OptiBond Universal, Prime&Bond Universal and Adhese in an in vitro experimental model, monocyte/macrophage cell line SC (ATCC CRL-9855). The cytotoxicity was measured by means of XTT assay, whereas the genotoxicity (comet assay) was evaluated based on the percentage of DNA present in the comet tail. Furthermore, the ability of the adhesives to induce apoptosis was analyzed using flow cytometry (FC) with the FITC annexin V/propidium iodide (PI) double staining. The analysis of the cell cycle progression was performed with FC using PI staining. OptiBond Universal presented significant, while Prime&Bond Universal and Adhese Universal had minimal cytotoxicity and genotoxicity towards human SC cells. Moreover, only OptiBond Universal increased the level of apoptosis in SC cell line. None of the adhesives showed significant cell cycle arrest, as revealed by FC analysis. Due to substantial differences in toxicity in in vitro studies of dental adhesives, there is a great need for further research in order to establish more reliable test protocols allowing for standardized methodology.