Search

Interface integrity can be maintained by setting the composite in a layering technique and using liners. Objective The aim of this in vitro study was to verify the effect of resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) lining and composite layering technique on the bond strength of the dentin/resin adhesive interface of lateral walls of occlusal restorations. Material and Methods Occlusal cavities were prepared in 52 extracted sound human molars, randomly assigned into 4 groups: Group 2H (control) – no lining + two horizontal layers; Group 4O: no lining + four oblique layers; Group V-2H: RMGIC lining (Vitrebond) + two horizontal layers; and Group V-4O: RMGIC lining (Vitrebond) + four oblique layers. Resin composite (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE) was placed after application of an adhesive system (Adper™ Single Bond 2, 3M ESPE) dyed with a fluorescent reagent (Rhodamine B) to allow confocal microscopy analysis. The teeth were stored in deionized water at 37oC for 24 hours before being sectioned into 0.8 mm slices. One slice of each tooth was randomly selected for Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) analysis. The other slices were sectioned into 0.8 mm x 0.8 mm sticks to microtensile bond strength test (MPa). Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s test. Results There was no statistical difference on bond strength among groups (p>0.05). CLSM analysis showed no significant statistical difference regarding the presence of gap at the interface dentin/resin among groups. Conclusions RMGIC lining and composite layering techniques showed no effect on the microtensile bond strength and gap formation at the adhesive interface of lateral walls of high C-factor occlusal restorations.

To assess the influence of simulated oral erosive/abrasive challenges on the bond strength of an etch-and-rinse two-step bonding system to enamel using an in situ/ex vivo protocol.Bovine enamel blocks were prepared and randomly assigned to four groups: CONT - control (no challenge), ABR - 3x/day-1 minute toothbrushing; ERO - 3x/day - 5 minutes extraoral immersion into regular Coca Cola; and ERO+ABR - erosive protocol followed by a 1-minute toothbrushing. Eight blocks were placed into an acrylic palatal appliance for each volunteer (n = 13), who wore the appliance for 5 days. Two blocks were subjected to each of the four challenges. Subsequently, all the blocks were washed with tap water and Adper Single Bond 2/Filtek Z350 were placed. After 24 hours, 1 mm2 beams were obtained from each block to be tested with the microtensile bond strength test (50 N load at 0.5 mm/minute). The data were statistically analyzed by one-way RM-ANOVA and Tukey's tests (alpha = 0.05).No difference was detected among the ABR, ERO, and CONT groups (P0.05). ERO+ABR group yielded lower bond strengths than either the ABR and ERO groups (P0.0113).