Method: Extracted non-restored human molars were sectioned to expose occlusal dentin. Dentin surface was finished to standardize the smear layer. Eight experimental groups were tested: G1-KetacNanoPrimer+KetacNano, G2-KetacConditioner+KetacNano, G3-KetacNanoPrimer+Photac Fil, G4-KetacConditioner+Photac Fil, G5-GCSelfConditioner+Fuji FillingLC, G6-GCCavityConditioner+FujiFillingLC, G7-GC Self Conditioner+FujiIILC and G8-GCCavityConditioner+FujiIILC. Specimens were stored at 37°C for 24h in 100% humidity before cutting non-trimmed beams (0.8×0.8mm2) for µTBS testing. Nine beams from each tooth were tested in a universal testing machine (1mm/min). Debonded specimens were examined under a stereomicroscope to evaluate failure mode. Weibull-distribution survival analysis was used to compare the differences in microtensile peak stress among the groups.
Result: Microtensile data is provided below (G6-pre-test failure). G5 demonstrated a cohesive failure mode, while failure for other groups was predominantly adhesive.
Groups |
Teeth(N) |
N Beams |
Min |
Max |
Mean(SE) |
Weibull Characteristic Strength |
Weibull Modulus |
1 |
10 |
84 |
0.2 |
33.8 |
9.5(1.0) |
16.4 |
1.9 |
2 |
10 |
89 |
2.0 |
26.0 |
11.0(1.0) |
19.3 |
2.3 |
3 |
12 |
106 |
1.4 |
42.1 |
20.0(1.0) |
34.7 |
3.1 |
4 |
11 |
107 |
4.9 |
34.9 |
16.8(0.9) |
29.3 |
3.0 |
5 |
12 |
98 |
1.7 |
28.7 |
15.1(1.0) |
26.3 |
3.1 |
7 |
12 |
107 |
2.1 |
44.7 |
20.0(1.0) |
34.7 |
3.5 |
8 |
12 |
99 |
0.8 |
36.0 |
14.1(0.9) |
24.4 |
2.6 |
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the use of the novel non-rinse conditioners did not improve the µTBS of new RMGIC to dentin. By contrast, the novel non-rinse conditioners enhanced µTBS of traditional RMGIC.
Study partially supported by GC America.
Keywords: Adhesion, Dental materials, Dentin, Glass ionomers and Stress
See more of: Dental Materials 1: Adhesion - Bond Strength Testing and Mechanisms