Do in vitro and in situ erosive challenges alter the bonding performance of universal adhesives?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorde Aguiar Moreira, Pedro Henrique
dc.contributor.authorWendlinger, Michel
dc.contributor.authorde Faria Nonato, Rammon
dc.contributor.authorLincoln Calixto, Abraham
dc.contributor.authorBinz-Ordonez, María Cristina
dc.contributor.authorFigueredo de Siqueira, Fabiana Suelen
dc.contributor.authorLoguercio, Alessandro D.
dc.contributor.authorMillan Cardenas, Andres Felipe
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-25T15:57:08Z
dc.date.available2025-03-25T15:57:08Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-01
dc.descriptionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S014374962400191X
dc.description.abstractObjective To evaluate microtensile bond strengths (μTBS), nanoleakage (NL), and degree of conversion (DC) of two universal adhesives, using etch-and-rinse (ER) or self-etch (SE) strategies on eroded dentin submitted to in vitro and in situ erosive challenges. Methods Dentin blocks were prepared from 120 human molars and categorized based on dentin condition (sound, in vitro eroded, and in situ eroded), adhesive system (Scotchbond Universal [SBU] and Zip bond Universal [ZIP]), and adhesive strategy (ER and SE). In the in situ erosive challenge, 20 volunteers wore acrylic resin palatal devices with dentin blocks, immersing them in cola soft drink for 90 s, six times daily for 15 days. The same erosive protocol was used in vitro, followed by rinsing and remineralization. Sound dentin blocks served as controls. Afterward, all dentin blocks were restored with composite resin and sectioned into resin-dentin bonded sticks for μTBS, NL, and DC assessments. Data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Results Sound dentin exhibited the highest μTBS and DC values and the lowest NL values, while in situ eroded dentin showed the lowest μTBS and DC values and the highest NL values (p = 0.000001). While some differences in the μTBS values were observed between universal adhesives when evaluated on sound dentin (p = 0.0001), no significant differences between adhesives were observed when tested on in vitro and in situ eroded dentin. Regarding NL and DC, no significant differences were found between SBU and ZIP, as well as among adhesive strategies (p > 0.05). Conclusion Erosion in dentin, especially under in situ conditions, presents significant challenges to the adhesion of restorative materials. The choice of an effective adhesive system is crucial, as dentin eroded in situ showed lower adhesion strength and greater nanoleakage. These results highlight the need for specific clinical strategies to improve the durability and effectiveness of restorations.
dc.identifier.issn1879-0127
dc.identifier.issn0143-7496
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.uhemisferios.edu.ec/handle/123456789/2054
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives
dc.relation.ispartofseriesV. 134
dc.titleDo in vitro and in situ erosive challenges alter the bonding performance of universal adhesives?
dc.title.alternative¿Los desafíos erosivos in vitro e in situ alteran el rendimiento de unión de los adhesivos universales?
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Do in vitro and in situ erosive challenges alter the bonding performance of universal adhesives_ - ScienceDirect.pdf
Size:
241.99 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos en revistas SCOPUS o ISI