Degradation of resin-dentin bonds of etch-and-rinse adhesive system to primary and permanent teeth

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the degradation of resin-dentin bonds of an etch-and-rinse adhesive system to primary and permanent teeth. Flat superficial coronal dentin surfaces from 5 primary second molars and 5 permanent third molars were etched with phosphoric acid and bonded with an adhesive system (Adper Single Bond 2, 3M ESPE). Blocks of resin composite (Z250, 3M ESPE) were built up and the teeth sectioned to produce bonded sticks with a 0.8 mm(2) cross-sectional area. The sticks of each tooth were randomly divided and assigned to be subjected to microtensile testing immediately (24 h) or after aging by water storage (6 months). Data were analyzed by two-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey post hoc test (alpha = 0.05). Failure mode was evaluated using a stereomicroscope (400x). Microtensile values significantly decreased after the 6 months aging, independent of the dentin substrate. In 24 h, the values obtained to primary dentin were lower compared with permanent dentin. This difference was not maintained after aging. Adhesive/mixed failure was predominant in all experimental groups. In conclusion, degradation of resin-dentin bonds of the etch-and-rinse adhesive system occurred after 6 months of water storage; however, the reduction in bond strength values was higher for permanent teeth

Chlorhexidine does not increase immediate bond strength of etch-and-rinse adhesive to caries-affected dentin of primary and permanent teeth

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of 2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) on immediate bond strength of etch-and-rinse adhesive to sound (SD) and caries-affected (CAD) primary dentin compared with permanent dentin. Flat dentin surfaces from 20 primary molars (Pri) and 20 permanent molars (Perm) were assigned to 8 experimental groups (n=5) according to tooth type (Pri or Perm), dentin condition (SD or CAD - pH-cycling for 14 days) and treatment (control - C or 60 s application of 2% CHX solution after acid etching - CHX). The bonding system (Adper Single Bond 2) was applied according to manufacturer's instructions followed by resin composite application (Filtek Z250). After 24 h water storage, specimens with cross-section area of 0.8 mm² were prepared for being tested under microtensile test (1 mm/min). Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (&#945;=0.05). Failure mode was evaluated using a stereomicroscope at ×400. Treatment with CHX did not result in higher bond strength values than no pre-treatment (C groups), independently of tooth type. Primary teeth and caries-affected dentin showed significantly lower (p<0.05) bond strength means compared with permanent teeth and sound dentin, respectively. Predominance of adhesive/mixed failure was observed for all groups. CHX did not influence the immediate bond strength to sound or caries-affected dentin of primary and permanent teeth

Comparative study of national and international adhesive systems: dentin bond strength, tensile strength and SEM

O objetivo deste trabalho foi comparar sistemas adesivos de fabricação nacional - Magic Bond DE (Vigodent), Master Bond (Biodinâmica) e Self Etch Bond (Vigodent) e similares importados - Adper Single Bond 2 (3M/ESPE) e Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) por meio da avaliação da resistência de união, resistência à tração e micromorfologia da interface. Para a avaliação da resistência de união foram utilizados vinte e cinco molares humanos hígidos (n=5). Os dentes foram preparados de modo a obterem-se superfícies planas em dentina, sobre as quais os sistemas adesivos foram aplicados seguindo as instruções dos fabricantes. Após 24 horas de armazenamento em água destilada a 37oC os dentes restaurados foram seccionados para obterem-se corpos-de-prova com área aderida de aproximadamente 0,8mm2. Metade dos corpos-de-prova foi submetida imediatamente ao teste de microtração, com velocidade de 0,5 mm/min até o momento da fratura. Os demais corpos de prova foram armazenados por mais 6 meses antes da realização do teste. A resistência à tração foi avaliada em corposde- prova (n=10) usinados em forma de haltere, com secção transversal aproximada de 0,4 mm2. O teste foi realizado em períodos idênticos aos do ensaio de microtração. Para a análise em microscopia eletrônica de varredura dois dentes foram preparados para cada sistema adesivo. Os valores obtidos foram submetidos à análise de variância e teste de correlação de Pearson. Os resultados obtidos no teste de resistência de união mostraram que, em 24 horas, os sistemas Adper Single Bond 2 e Master Bond apresentaram médias superiores aos demais sistemas adesivos nacionais e inferiores ao sistema importado Clearfil SE Bond. Já após 6 meses, os dois sistemas importados foram superiores aos nacionais. Considerando os valores obtidos no teste de resistência à tração, os sistemas nacionais foram similares entre si nos dois momentos de avaliação. O sistema Clearfil SE Bond apresentou a maior média em 24 horas e média similar a dos sistemas nacionais após o armazenamento, com a maior redução nos valores de resistência à tração. O sistema Adper Single Bond 2 apresentou as menores médias nos dois períodos. Não foi encontrada correlação entre as variáveis resistência de união e resistência à tração. Na análise em microscopia eletrônica de varredura, interfaces defeituosas foram observadas para os sistemas adesivos nacionais, com exceção das formadas pelo sistema Master Bond. Os sistemas adesivos nacionais, exceto o Self Etch Bond, tiveram a durabilidade da união comprometida, o que não ocorreu com os similares importados. A resistência mecânica dos sistemas adesivos não influenciou a resistência de união proporcionada, em nenhum dos períodos avaliados.The aim of this study was to compare national adhesive systems to similar imported materials by microtensile bond strength test, tensile strength and SEM evaluation. The adhesive systems evaluated were Magic Bond DE (Vigodent), Master Bond (Biodinâmica) and Self Etch Bond (Vigodent), from national manufacturer and similar imported materials Adper Single Bond 2 (3M/ESPE) and Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray). For bond strength evaluation twenty five sound human molars were used, divided into five groups and prepared in order to obtain flat dentin surfaces in which the adhesive systems were applied following manufacturers instructions and resin blocks were made. After 24 hours of storage in distilled water at 37oC restores teeth were sectioned in order to obtain specimen with a bonded area of around 0,8mm2. Half of the specimen were immediately submitted to the test with a crosshead speed of 0,5 mm/min until fracture the other specimen were stored for additional 6 month prior to the test. Tensile strength was evaluated in adhesive dumbbell trimmed specimen with cross section area of around 0,4 mm2. The test was performed at the same storage periods used in the bond strength test. For the SEM analysis two teeth with each material were prepared. The values were submitted to ANOVA and Pearson correlation. The results of bond strength showed that in 24 hours Adper Single Bond 2 and Master Bond produced higher values compared to the other systems and lower than Clearfil SE Bond. After 6 months the two imported materials were superior to the national adhesive systems. Regarding tensile strength the national adhesive systems were similar to each other in both periods. Clearfil SE Bond showed the highest mean in 24 hours and after 6 months was similar to national adhesive systems. Adper Single Bond 2 showed the lower means in both periods. No correlation was found between bond strength and tensile strength. In SEM analisys defective interfaces were found to national adhesive systems excluding Master Bond. National adhesive systems bond strength longevity was compromised, excluding Self Etch Bond. After storage Clearfil SE Bond diminished tensile strength. In both storage times tensile strength did not influenced bond strength

Comparative study of national and international adhesive systems: dentin bond strength, tensile strength and SEM

O objetivo deste trabalho foi comparar sistemas adesivos de fabricação nacional - Magic Bond DE (Vigodent), Master Bond (Biodinâmica) e Self Etch Bond (Vigodent) e similares importados - Adper Single Bond 2 (3M/ESPE) e Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray) por meio da avaliação da resistência de união, resistência à tração e micromorfologia da interface. Para a avaliação da resistência de união foram utilizados vinte e cinco molares humanos hígidos (n=5). Os dentes foram preparados de modo a obterem-se superfícies planas em dentina, sobre as quais os sistemas adesivos foram aplicados seguindo as instruções dos fabricantes. Após 24 horas de armazenamento em água destilada a 37oC os dentes restaurados foram seccionados para obterem-se corpos-de-prova com área aderida de aproximadamente 0,8mm2. Metade dos corpos-de-prova foi submetida imediatamente ao teste de microtração, com velocidade de 0,5 mm/min até o momento da fratura. Os demais corpos de prova foram armazenados por mais 6 meses antes da realização do teste. A resistência à tração foi avaliada em corposde- prova (n=10) usinados em forma de haltere, com secção transversal aproximada de 0,4 mm2. O teste foi realizado em períodos idênticos aos do ensaio de microtração. Para a análise em microscopia eletrônica de varredura dois dentes foram preparados para cada sistema adesivo. Os valores obtidos foram submetidos à análise de variância e teste de correlação de Pearson. Os resultados obtidos no teste de resistência de união mostraram que, em 24 horas, os sistemas Adper Single Bond 2 e Master Bond apresentaram médias superiores aos demais sistemas adesivos nacionais e inferiores ao sistema importado Clearfil SE Bond. Já após 6 meses, os dois sistemas importados foram superiores aos nacionais. Considerando os valores obtidos no teste de resistência à tração, os sistemas nacionais foram similares entre si nos dois momentos de avaliação. O sistema Clearfil SE Bond apresentou a maior média em 24 horas e média similar a dos sistemas nacionais após o armazenamento, com a maior redução nos valores de resistência à tração. O sistema Adper Single Bond 2 apresentou as menores médias nos dois períodos. Não foi encontrada correlação entre as variáveis resistência de união e resistência à tração. Na análise em microscopia eletrônica de varredura, interfaces defeituosas foram observadas para os sistemas adesivos nacionais, com exceção das formadas pelo sistema Master Bond. Os sistemas adesivos nacionais, exceto o Self Etch Bond, tiveram a durabilidade da união comprometida, o que não ocorreu com os similares importados. A resistência mecânica dos sistemas adesivos não influenciou a resistência de união proporcionada, em nenhum dos períodos avaliados.The aim of this study was to compare national adhesive systems to similar imported materials by microtensile bond strength test, tensile strength and SEM evaluation. The adhesive systems evaluated were Magic Bond DE (Vigodent), Master Bond (Biodinâmica) and Self Etch Bond (Vigodent), from national manufacturer and similar imported materials Adper Single Bond 2 (3M/ESPE) and Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray). For bond strength evaluation twenty five sound human molars were used, divided into five groups and prepared in order to obtain flat dentin surfaces in which the adhesive systems were applied following manufacturers instructions and resin blocks were made. After 24 hours of storage in distilled water at 37oC restores teeth were sectioned in order to obtain specimen with a bonded area of around 0,8mm2. Half of the specimen were immediately submitted to the test with a crosshead speed of 0,5 mm/min until fracture the other specimen were stored for additional 6 month prior to the test. Tensile strength was evaluated in adhesive dumbbell trimmed specimen with cross section area of around 0,4 mm2. The test was performed at the same storage periods used in the bond strength test. For the SEM analysis two teeth with each material were prepared. The values were submitted to ANOVA and Pearson correlation. The results of bond strength showed that in 24 hours Adper Single Bond 2 and Master Bond produced higher values compared to the other systems and lower than Clearfil SE Bond. After 6 months the two imported materials were superior to the national adhesive systems. Regarding tensile strength the national adhesive systems were similar to each other in both periods. Clearfil SE Bond showed the highest mean in 24 hours and after 6 months was similar to national adhesive systems. Adper Single Bond 2 showed the lower means in both periods. No correlation was found between bond strength and tensile strength. In SEM analisys defective interfaces were found to national adhesive systems excluding Master Bond. National adhesive systems bond strength longevity was compromised, excluding Self Etch Bond. After storage Clearfil SE Bond diminished tensile strength. In both storage times tensile strength did not influenced bond strength

Is there a best conventional material for restoring posterior primary teeth? A network meta-analysis

Abstract This study aimed to compare the longevity of different conventional restorative materials placed in posterior primary teeth. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016035775). A comprehensive electronic search without date or language restrictions was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) and Clinical Trials databases up to January 2017, selecting randomized clinical trials that assessed the longevity of at least two different conventional restorative materials performed in primary molars. Seventeen studies were included in this systematic review. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed and relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Restorations of primary molars with conventional glass ionomer cement showed increased risk of failure than compomer, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, amalgam, and composite resin. Risk of bias was low in most studies (45.38% of all items across studies). Pediatric dentists should avoid conventional glass ionomer cement for restoring primary molars

Novel Pullulan/Gellan Gum Bilayer Film as a Vehicle for Silibinin-Loaded Nanocapsules in the Topical Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

In this study a novel gellan gum/pullulan bilayer film containing silibinin-loaded nanocapsules was developed for topical treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). The bilayer films were produced by applying a pullulan layer on a gellan gum layer incorporated with silibinin nanocapsules by two-step solvent casting method. The bilayer formation was confirmed by microscopic analysis. In vitro studies showed that pullulan imparts bioadhesitvity for the films and the presence of nanocapsules increased their occlusion factor almost 2-fold. Besides, the nano-based film presented a slow silibinin release and high affinity for cutaneous tissue. Moreover, this film presented high scavenger capacity and non-hemolytic property. In the in vivo study, interestingly, the treatments with vehicle film attenuated the scratching behavior and the ear edema in mice induced by 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB). However, the nano-based film containing silibinin modulated the inflammatory and oxidative parameters in a similar or more pronounced way than silibinin solution and vehicle film, as well as than hydrocortisone, a classical treatment of AD. In conclusion, these data suggest that itself gellan gum/pullulan bilayer film might attenuate the effects induced by DNCB, acting together with silibinin-loaded nanocapsules, which protected the skin from oxidative damage, improving the therapeutic effect in this AD-model