Tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems.

Timothy Hottel, John Antonelli, Laura Darnell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test and compare the tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems on dentinal surfaces. Scotchbond MP Plus (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000), Allbond 2 (Bisco INC. Itasca, IL 60143) and Prime & Bond 2.1 Dual Cure (DENTSPLY Caulk, Milford, DE 19963-0359) were the three agents tested following manufacturer's instructions on flat dentinal surfaces. A total of 60 teeth were obtained, prepared and stored in distilled, deionized water prior to testing. Twenty teeth were distributed randomly to each bonding agent product. Ten of the 20 were light-cured and the other 10 were activated chemically, thereby creating six experimental groups. "Enforce" (DENTSPLY Caulk) resin cement was placed in a cylinder on the bonding agent interface in all 60 teeth. A pull test was performed using an Instron machine (Instron Corp., Canton, MA 02021) at a speed of 1 mm/min and under continuous load until failure. This study demonstrated that no significant difference existed among the means of the six sample groups involved when they were compared against each other using two-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Yet, when comparing light-cured samples as a group, versus chemically-cured samples, light-cured samples produced a significantly stronger bond. When comparing adhesive systems, regardless of the cure method, Scotchbond MP Plus resulted in a significantly stronger bond than Allbond 2. When only comparing chemically-cured samples, Scotchbond MP Plus was significantly stronger than Allbond 2. Prime & Bond 2.1 was not significantly different than Scotchbond MP Plus or Allbond 2 regardless of cure type. No difference existed when comparing only light-cured samples. The bond strengths of adhesive systems are critical for the dentist in deciding which product to purchase to ensure the restoration will be a long-lasting one.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalThe Journal of the Tennessee Dental Association
Volume90
Issue number4
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Tensile Strength
Tooth
Light
Adhesives
Resin Cements
Dentists
Analysis of Variance
Scotchbond
Water

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems. / Hottel, Timothy; Antonelli, John; Darnell, Laura.

In: The Journal of the Tennessee Dental Association, Vol. 90, No. 4, 09.2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1c28aa0d24f94763871a4c1a1861691b,
title = "Tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems.",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to test and compare the tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems on dentinal surfaces. Scotchbond MP Plus (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000), Allbond 2 (Bisco INC. Itasca, IL 60143) and Prime & Bond 2.1 Dual Cure (DENTSPLY Caulk, Milford, DE 19963-0359) were the three agents tested following manufacturer's instructions on flat dentinal surfaces. A total of 60 teeth were obtained, prepared and stored in distilled, deionized water prior to testing. Twenty teeth were distributed randomly to each bonding agent product. Ten of the 20 were light-cured and the other 10 were activated chemically, thereby creating six experimental groups. {"}Enforce{"} (DENTSPLY Caulk) resin cement was placed in a cylinder on the bonding agent interface in all 60 teeth. A pull test was performed using an Instron machine (Instron Corp., Canton, MA 02021) at a speed of 1 mm/min and under continuous load until failure. This study demonstrated that no significant difference existed among the means of the six sample groups involved when they were compared against each other using two-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Yet, when comparing light-cured samples as a group, versus chemically-cured samples, light-cured samples produced a significantly stronger bond. When comparing adhesive systems, regardless of the cure method, Scotchbond MP Plus resulted in a significantly stronger bond than Allbond 2. When only comparing chemically-cured samples, Scotchbond MP Plus was significantly stronger than Allbond 2. Prime & Bond 2.1 was not significantly different than Scotchbond MP Plus or Allbond 2 regardless of cure type. No difference existed when comparing only light-cured samples. The bond strengths of adhesive systems are critical for the dentist in deciding which product to purchase to ensure the restoration will be a long-lasting one.",
author = "Timothy Hottel and John Antonelli and Laura Darnell",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "90",
journal = "Journal - Tennessee State Dental Association",
issn = "0040-3385",
publisher = "Tennessee Nurses Association",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems.

AU - Hottel, Timothy

AU - Antonelli, John

AU - Darnell, Laura

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - The purpose of this study was to test and compare the tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems on dentinal surfaces. Scotchbond MP Plus (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000), Allbond 2 (Bisco INC. Itasca, IL 60143) and Prime & Bond 2.1 Dual Cure (DENTSPLY Caulk, Milford, DE 19963-0359) were the three agents tested following manufacturer's instructions on flat dentinal surfaces. A total of 60 teeth were obtained, prepared and stored in distilled, deionized water prior to testing. Twenty teeth were distributed randomly to each bonding agent product. Ten of the 20 were light-cured and the other 10 were activated chemically, thereby creating six experimental groups. "Enforce" (DENTSPLY Caulk) resin cement was placed in a cylinder on the bonding agent interface in all 60 teeth. A pull test was performed using an Instron machine (Instron Corp., Canton, MA 02021) at a speed of 1 mm/min and under continuous load until failure. This study demonstrated that no significant difference existed among the means of the six sample groups involved when they were compared against each other using two-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Yet, when comparing light-cured samples as a group, versus chemically-cured samples, light-cured samples produced a significantly stronger bond. When comparing adhesive systems, regardless of the cure method, Scotchbond MP Plus resulted in a significantly stronger bond than Allbond 2. When only comparing chemically-cured samples, Scotchbond MP Plus was significantly stronger than Allbond 2. Prime & Bond 2.1 was not significantly different than Scotchbond MP Plus or Allbond 2 regardless of cure type. No difference existed when comparing only light-cured samples. The bond strengths of adhesive systems are critical for the dentist in deciding which product to purchase to ensure the restoration will be a long-lasting one.

AB - The purpose of this study was to test and compare the tensile bond strength of three dual-cure bonding systems on dentinal surfaces. Scotchbond MP Plus (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000), Allbond 2 (Bisco INC. Itasca, IL 60143) and Prime & Bond 2.1 Dual Cure (DENTSPLY Caulk, Milford, DE 19963-0359) were the three agents tested following manufacturer's instructions on flat dentinal surfaces. A total of 60 teeth were obtained, prepared and stored in distilled, deionized water prior to testing. Twenty teeth were distributed randomly to each bonding agent product. Ten of the 20 were light-cured and the other 10 were activated chemically, thereby creating six experimental groups. "Enforce" (DENTSPLY Caulk) resin cement was placed in a cylinder on the bonding agent interface in all 60 teeth. A pull test was performed using an Instron machine (Instron Corp., Canton, MA 02021) at a speed of 1 mm/min and under continuous load until failure. This study demonstrated that no significant difference existed among the means of the six sample groups involved when they were compared against each other using two-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Yet, when comparing light-cured samples as a group, versus chemically-cured samples, light-cured samples produced a significantly stronger bond. When comparing adhesive systems, regardless of the cure method, Scotchbond MP Plus resulted in a significantly stronger bond than Allbond 2. When only comparing chemically-cured samples, Scotchbond MP Plus was significantly stronger than Allbond 2. Prime & Bond 2.1 was not significantly different than Scotchbond MP Plus or Allbond 2 regardless of cure type. No difference existed when comparing only light-cured samples. The bond strengths of adhesive systems are critical for the dentist in deciding which product to purchase to ensure the restoration will be a long-lasting one.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053297370&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053297370&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 90

JO - Journal - Tennessee State Dental Association

JF - Journal - Tennessee State Dental Association

SN - 0040-3385

IS - 4

ER -