Effect of Tubular Orientation on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite-dentin using Universal Bonding Agents
Author(s): Zahra Khamverdi, Shahin Kasraei, Nafiseh Fazelian, Mahdi Akbarzadeh
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of dentinal tubules orientation on the composite-dentin microtensile bond strength using universal adhesives. A total of 36 caries-free third molars were selected. The teeth were allocated to (axial, wall) and (occlusal, floor) groups and each group was divided into three subgroups based on the type of bonding used. The specimens were then sectioned to obtain dentin-composite sticks with a binding area of approximately 1 mm2. Then sticks were mounted in the universal testing machine (UTM) at a crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min. Data collection was carried out using two-way ANOVA and T-test. Then, the failure mode of the specimens was observed using a stereomicroscope, and one specimen from each group was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The results of two-way ANOVA showed that the highest and lowest mean microtensile bond strength (μTBS) were observed in the group of Adper Single Bond 2 adhesive (axial, wall) (28.92±8.75) and Single Bond Universal adhesive (occlusal, floor) (12.83±7.90), respectively. On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the three adhesives in the mean of μTBS in the (occlusal, floor)orientation, but the mean μTBS of Adper Single Bond 2 adhisive was significantly higher than that of G-premio and Single Bond Universal adhesives in the (axial, wall) orientation (P=0.05). There was no significant difference in two universal adhesives (P= 0.994). The stereomicroscopic analysis showed that the highest adhesive failure was related to Adper Single Bond 2 in (axial, wall) orientation. However, the failure mode results were nearly identical in both adhesives in the (axial, wall) orientation. The failure mode results were also similar in all three adhesives in the (occlusal, floor) orientation. The dentinal tubules orientation showed no significant effect on the microtensile bond strength of the Gpremio, Single Bond Universal adhesives. Adper Single Bond 2 had a significantly higher μTBS rate in the (axial, wall) orientation, but its μTBS was similar to that of the universal adhesives in the (occlusal, floor) orientation, which was not statistically significant.
<