Bond strength of two universal adhesive systems to human dentin using different strategies

Página do item simplificado
dc.creatorDaniel José Braga Dutra
dc.creatorNatália Teixeira Tavares Branco
dc.creatorHugo H. Alvim
dc.creatorCláudia Silami de Magalhães
dc.creatorRicardo Reis Oliveira
dc.creatorAllyson Nogueira Moreira
dc.date.accessioned2023-11-20T20:10:25Z
dc.date.accessioned2025-09-08T23:00:08Z
dc.date.available2023-11-20T20:10:25Z
dc.date.issued2022-12-31
dc.description.sponsorshipFAPEMIG - Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais
dc.format.mimetypepdf
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.54589%2Faol.35%2F3%2F155
dc.identifier.issn1852-4834
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1843/61147
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais
dc.relation.ispartofActa Odontologica Latinoamericana
dc.rightsAcesso Aberto
dc.subjectOdontologia
dc.subjectOdontologia - Estética
dc.subject.otherDental Bonding
dc.subject.otherDentin
dc.subject.otherAdhesive
dc.titleBond strength of two universal adhesive systems to human dentin using different strategies
dc.title.alternativeResistência de união de sistemas adesivos universais à dentina humana usando diferentes estratégias
dc.typeArtigo de periódico
local.citation.epage163
local.citation.issue3
local.citation.spage155
local.citation.volume35
local.description.resumoThe objective of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to dentin of two universal adhesive systems: Single Bond Universal (SBU) and Ambar Universal (AU), used in different adhesion strategies. Materials and Method: Thirty-six human teeth were prepared (n=6) and treated following different adhesive strategies: G1: SBU-etch-and-rinse, applied on dry dentin; G2: SBUetch- and-rinse, applied on moist dentin; G3: SBU-self-etching; G4: AU-etch-and-rinse, applied on dry dentin; G5: AU-etch-and-rinse, applied on moist dentin; G6: AU-self-etching. The specimens were submitted to μTBS test, failure analysis, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (p<0.05). Results: Microtensile bond strength was significantly lower in G1 than G2 and G3. AU adhesive performed worse than the SBU system, except in G5. Cohesive and mixed failures predominated in G1 and G2, while adhesive failures predominated in G3 and G5. Conclusions: Universal adhesives are an interesting innovation, but there are still doubts about their performance, mainly regarding the different protocols provided by the manufacturers. The conventional adhesive strategy on moist dentin demonstrated higher μTBS for both adhesives. The use of the selfetching strategy with the SBU showed promising results.
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1990-6243
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3217-4684
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1861-226X
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-8089
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8397-9557
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7022-5593
local.publisher.countryBrasil
local.publisher.departmentFAO - DEPARTAMENTO DE ODONTOLOGIA RESTAURADORA
local.publisher.initialsUFMG
local.url.externahttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10283391/#

Arquivos

Pacote original

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
Bond strength of two universal adhesive systems to human dentin using different strategies.pdf
Tamanho:
511.63 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Baixar

Licença do pacote

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
License.txt
Tamanho:
1.99 KB
Formato:
Plain Text
Descrição:
Baixar

Coleções

Artigo de Periódico

Logo UFMG