EVALUATION OF BOND STRENGTH OF DIFFERENT DENTAL ADHESIVES TO TOOTH STRUCTURE IN PAKISTANI PATIENTS
Main Article Content
Keywords
Dental adhesives, bond strength, Total-Etch, Self-Etch, Universal Adhesive, enamel, dentin, Pakistan
Abstract
Background: The efficacy of dental adhesives might vary depending on local patient characteristics, but they are essential for long-lasting bonding between restorative materials and tooth structures.
Objective: To evaluate and compare the bond strength of different dental adhesive systems to enamel and dentin in extracted teeth from Pakistani patients.
Methodology: An in vitro experimental study was conducted at Department of Dental Material, Islamabad from January to June 2024. The 126 permanent human teeth that were taken from patients in Pakistan were split evenly into three groups based on the adhesive method that was used: Universal Adhesive, Self-Etch, and Total-Etch. In accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, teeth with undamaged enamel and dentin were prepped by flattening their surfaces and then glued with composite resin. Prior to shear bond strength testing using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, specimens were kept in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. Megapascals (MPa) were used to record the bond strength values. One-way ANOVA was used to evaluate the data, and p ≤ 0.05 was chosen as the significance level.
Results: Self-Etch adhesives (enamel: 19.48 ± 2.94 MPa; dentin: 16.21 ± 3.05 MPa) and Universal Adhesives (enamel: 21.02 ± 3.25 MPa; dentin: 17.89 ± 2.76 MPa) were the next two adhesives with the greatest mean bond strength to enamel (22.56 ± 3.12 MPa) and dentin (18.34 ± 2.87 MPa). For both enamel and dentin bond strengths, a one-way ANOVA showed statistically significant differences across adhesive systems (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Total-Etch adhesives demonstrated superior bond strength, with Universal Adhesives showing comparable performance, while Self-Etch adhesives exhibited lower bond strength in this Pakistani sample.
References
2. Caiafa A, Visser L. Restorative dentistry. Wiggs's Veterinary Dentistry: Principles and Practice. 2019 Feb 8:357-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118816219.ch17.
3. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, Cadenaro M, Di Lenarda R, Dorigo ED. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dental materials. 2008 Jan 1;24(1):90-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.009.
4. Amin F, Fareed MA, Zafar MS, Khurshid Z, Palma PJ, Kumar N. Degradation and stabilization of resin-dentine interfaces in polymeric dental adhesives: an updated review. Coatings. 2022 Aug 1;12(8):1094. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12081094.
5. Bourgi R, Kharouf N, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Lukomska-Szymanska M, Haikel Y, Hardan L. A literature review of adhesive systems in dentistry: Key components and their clinical applications. Applied Sciences. 2024 Sep 10;14(18):8111. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14188111.
6. Sebold M, André CB, Sahadi BO, Breschi L, Giannini M. Chronological history and current advancements of dental adhesive systems development: a narrative review. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology. 2021 Sep 17;35(18):1941-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2020.1865611
7. Marques AC, Mocanu A, Tomić NZ, Balos S, Stammen E, Lundevall A, Abrahami ST, Günther R, de Kok JM, Teixeira de Freitas S. Review on adhesives and surface treatments for structural applications: Recent developments on sustainability and implementation for metal and composite substrates. Materials. 2020 Dec 8;13(24):5590. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13245590.
8. Alomran WK, Nizami MZ, Xu HH, Sun J. Evolution of Dental Resin Adhesives—A Comprehensive Review. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2025 Mar 14;16(3):104. doi: 10.3390/jfb16030104.
9. Olariu I, Marian D, Veja I, Flueras R, Popovici RA, Pitic DE, Stana HA, Vaida LL, Lile IE. Exploring Dentists’ Preferences in Selecting Adhesive Systems: A Survey Analysis. Applied Sciences. 2024 Nov 5;14(22):10119. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210119.
10. Bourgi R, Kharouf N, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Lukomska-Szymanska M, Haikel Y, Hardan L. A literature review of adhesive systems in dentistry: Key components and their clinical applications. Applied Sciences. 2024 Sep 10;14(18):8111. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14188111.
11. Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives: Part II: etching effects on unground enamel. Dental Materials. 2001 Sep 1;17(5):430-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00104-4.
12. Lagarde M, Vennat E, Attal JP, Dursun E. Strategies to optimize bonding of adhesive materials to molar‐incisor hypomineralization‐affected enamel: A systematic review. International journal of paediatric dentistry. 2020 Jul;30(4):405-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ipd.12621.
13. Erickson RL, Barkmeier WW, Latta MA. The role of etching in bonding to enamel: a comparison of self-etching and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems. Dental materials. 2009 Nov 1;25(11):1459-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.07.002.
14. Van Meerbeek B, Van Landuyt K, De Munck J, Hashimoto M, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Suzuki K. Technique-sensitivity of contemporary adhesives. Dental materials journal. 2005;24(1):1-3. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.24.1
15. Brkanović S, Sever EK, Vukelja J, Ivica A, Miletić I, Krmek SJ. Comparison of different universal adhesive systems on dentin bond strength. Materials. 2023 Feb 12;16(4):1530. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16041530.
16. Frankenberger R, Tay FR. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dental Materials. 2005 May 1;21(5):397-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.005.
17. Takamizawa T, Barkmeier WW, Tsujimoto A, Berry TP, Watanabe H, Erickson RL, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Influence of different etching modes on bond strength and fatigue strength to dentin using universal adhesive systems. Dental Materials. 2016 Feb 1;32(2):e9-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.11.005.