Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 1442
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 169-173

Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of sixth- and seventh-generation bonding agents with varying pH – An in vitro study


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maratha Mandal Nathagirao G Halgekar Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Belgaum, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Asim Jamadar
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maratha Mandal Nathagirao G Halgekar Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Bauxite Road Opposite, APMC Police Station, Belgaum - 590 010, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_543_19

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: To compare and evaluate the shear bond strength of sixth- and seventh-generation bonding agents with varying pH – an in vitro study. Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted human premolar teeth were collected and cleaned and polished with pumice and water. The root portion of teeth was resected, and only the coronal portion was embedded in the cold-cure acrylic resin. The labial surface of mounted teeth was prepared with a high-speed handpiece using #245 carbide bur. The samples prepared were divided into four groups, with 20 specimens in each group:
  • Group A: Sixth-generation bonding agent, Adper Prompt L-Pop (APLP) (3M ESPE)
  • Group B: Sixth-generation bonding agent, Xeno III (X III) (Dentsply)
  • Group C: Seventh-generation bonding agent, Adper Easy One (AEO) (3M ESPE)
  • Group D: Seventh-generation bonding agent, Xeno IV (X IV) (Dentsply).
Tooth surface were rinsed and dried, and bonding agents were applied on tooth surface. Composite resin (Z-350 XT, 3M ESPE) was placed in a two-layer increment on tooth and was light cured. Specimens were subjected to the universal testing machine in a compression mode force at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min keeping blade parallel to the adhesive–dentin interface. Shear force required to debond the specimen was recorded in megapascal. The data obtained were analyzed statistically using ANOVA and post hoc test. Results: AEO (pH = 2.3, Group C seventh generation) showed higher bond strength, and pH values did not influence the shear bond strength significantly in the tested adhesive systems. Conclusion: The pH values did not influence the shear bond strength significantly in the tested adhesive systems. ADPER EASY ONE (pH= 2.3, GROUP C Seventh Generation) showed higher bond strength followed by XENO IV(pH = 2.1, GROUP D) ,XENO III (pH = 1.5, GROUP B) on dentinal surface ,where as ADPER PROMPT L POP (pH =0.7 to 1 Sixth Generation, GROUP A) showed lower bond strength.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed570    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded47    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal