Bond strength and adhesive interfacial micromorphology of self-adhesive resin cements: Effect of reduced times of pre-etching

Immediate and long-term microshear bond strength of resin-based cements to core build-up materials

Background

To evaluate the microshear bond strength (μ-SBS) between resin-based cements and core build-up materials after water storage.

Material and Methods

Cylinders (1x1 mm) of conventional dual-cure resin cement (RelyX ARC, 3M ESPE), universal dual-cure resin cement (RelyX Ultimate, 3M ESPE) or self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U200, 3M ESPE) were adhered to disks (6x2 mm) made with commercial core build-up materials (Bis-Core, Bisco or LuxaCore Z, DMG) or conventional nanocomposite resin (Filtek Z350 XT, 3M ESPE). The specimens (n=10) were submitted to μ-SBS test using a universal testing machine and fracture pattern analysis at 48 hours or after 9 months of water storage. The data were evaluated by three-way ANOVA for repeated measures and Tukey’s test (α=0.05).

Results

After 48 hours, regardless of the resin-based cement used, the μ-SBS to the conventional resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT) was greater compared to other materials. However, after 9 months, there was a statistically significant decrease in μ-SBS values between the conventional resin composite and evaluated luting agents. The μ-SBS values of core build-up commercial materials (Bis-Core and LuxaCore Z) did not change over time. Regardless of the composite used and storage time, there was no statistically significant difference between the resin-based cements. After 48 h, the most prevalent failure was mixed for all groups. However, after 9 months, the core build-up materials showed a predominantly mixed fracture pattern whereas the resin composite presented an adhesive pattern.

Conclusions

Commercial core build-up materials achieved stable bonding performance with resin-based cements over time.

Key words:Composite resins, resin cement, dental restoration failure.

Micromorphology of the Adhesive Interface of Self-Adhesive Resin Cements to Enamel and Dentin

Interfaces between dentin, enamel and luting agents were characterized using low vacuum Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). After smear layer creation, one of three luting agents (RelyX Unicem 2, Clearfil SA Cement and Panavia F 2.0/ED Primer II) was applied on 60 enamel-dentin specimens and dual-cured or self-cured. Specimens were polished (Experiment 1) and subsequently demineralized and deproteinized (Experiment 2). Adhesive interfaces were analyzed (low vacuum SEM, ×3000). Presence of an interdiffusion zone, tag-like structures (dentin) and marginal gaps (enamel) were assessed. Non-parametrical tests (χ2-test, α = 0.05) were performed. The first null-hypothesis was that the adhesive interface micromorphology between enamel and dentin and self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) is similar with conventional resin cement used with a self-etch adhesive (CRC+SE). The second null-hypothesis was that the micromorphology is not influenced by curing modes. Interdiffusion zones and tag-like structures (dentin) were observed more frequently for CRC+SE compared to SARCs. For each luting agent, there was a non-significant (p > 0.05) tendency for interdiffusion zone and tag-like structures detectable in more specimens after self-curing compared to dual-curing. Marginal gaps (enamel) were found only for SARCs. The first null-hypothesis was not rejected fully: Tag-like structures and interdiffusion zones in dentin were found for CRC+SE and SARCs. The second null-hypothesis was not rejected.