THE JOURNAL OF - Dentsply

Söderholm
ceived a restoration that later fails. Today, most research indicates
that the 4th generation adhesives still serve as the
gold standard, but because of the interest dentists show in
the 7th generation adhesives, it seems clear that dentists
want simple-to-use adhesives. Because of that wish, they are
willing to explore adhesives that are easier to use, despite
the risk that they may have more failures with such products.
Thanks to what has been learned during that cycle of the
evolution process, these easier-to-use products have
evolved during the past few years, and today it seems that
the clinical success rate of 7th generation adhesives is approaching
that of the 4th generation adhesives. 2,3,16,18,21,23,
26,30,32,36,41,44
By looking back at adhesives, we must admit that
progress has been made since Hagger’s idea that resins
could be bonded to tooth surfaces. Nevertheless, we should
also remember that in 1949, when Hagger came up with his
revolutionary idea to use glycerolphosphoric acid dimethacrylate
in Sevriton Cavity Seal, he had in fact invented a selfetching
adhesive. Based on the definitions, we can classify
Sevriton Cavity Seal as a 7th generation adhesive. Perhaps
improvements of dental materials don’t occur as fast as
many of us believe.
REFERENCES
1. Alhadainy HA, Abdalla AI. 2-year clinical evaluation of dentin bonding systems.
Am J Dent 1996;9:77-79.
2. Aw TC, Lepe X, Johnson GH, Mancl L. One-year clinical evaluation of an
ethanol-based and a solvent-free dentin adhesive. Am J Dent 2004;17:451-
456.
3. Aw TC, Lepe X, Johnson GH, Mancl LA. A three-year clinical evaluation of twobottle
versus one-bottle dentin adhesives. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136:311-
322.
4. Barkmeier WW. International Symposium on adhesives in dentistry. Oper
Dent 1992;Suppl 5.
5. Bowen RL, Blosser RL, Johnston AD. Effects of ferric oxalate purity on adhesive
bonding to dentin [abstract 915]. J Dent Res 1985;64:276.
6. Bowen RL, Cobb EN. A method for bonding to dentin and enamel. J Am Dent
Assoc 1983;107:734-736.
7. Bowen RL. Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues. I.
method of determining bond strength. J Dent Res 1965;44:690-695.
8. Bowen RL. Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues. II.
Bonding to dentin promoted by a surface-active comonomer. J Dent Res
1965;44:895-902.
9. Bowen RL. Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues.III.
Bonding to dentin improved by pre-treatment and the use of surface-active
comonomer. J Dent Res 1965;44:903-905.
10. Bowen RL. Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues. IV.
Bonding to dentin, enamel, and fluorapatite improved by the use of a surfaceactive
comonomer. J Dent Res 1965;44:906-911.
11. Bowen RL. Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues. VI.
Forces developing in direct-filling materials during hardening. J Am Dent Assoc
1967;74:439-445.
12. Brännström M, Nyborg H. The presence of bacteria in cavities filled with silicate
cement and composite resin materials. Sven Tandlak Tidskr
1971;64:149-155.
13. Brudevold F, Buonocore M, Wileman W. A report on a resin composition capable
of bonding to human dentin surfaces. J Dent Res 1956;35:846-851.
14. Brunton PA, Cowan AJ, Wilson MA, Wilson NH. A three-year evaluation of
restorations placed with a smear-layer-mediated dentin bonding agent in
non-carious cervical lesions. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:333-341.
15. Buonocore M. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling
materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955;34:849-853.
16. Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Two-year clinical evaluation of One-Up Bond F in noncarious
cervical lesions. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:65-68.
17. Chigira H, Manabe A, Itoh K, Wakumoto S, Hayakawa T. Efficacy of glyceryl
methacrylate as a dentin primer. Dent Mater J 1989;8:194-199.
18. Dalton Bittencourt D, Ezecelevski IG, Reis A, Van Dijken JW, Loguercio AD. An
18-months' evaluation of self-etch and etch & rinse adhesive in non-carious
cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2005;30:275-281.
19. Dunn WJ, Söderholm KJ. Comparison of shear and flexural bond strength
tests versus failure modes of dentin bonding systems. Am J Dent 2001;
14:297-303.
20. Fastlicht S. Tooth Mutilations and Dentistry in Pre-Columbian Mexico. Chicago:
Quintessence 1976.
21. Federlin M, Thonemann B, Schmalz G, Urlinger T. Clinical evaluation of different
adhesive systems for restoring teeth with erosion lesions. Clin Oral Investig
1998;2:58-66.
22. Fusayama T, Nakamura M, Kurosaki N, Iwaku M. Non-pressure adhesion of
a new adhesive restorative resin. J Dent Res 1979;58:1364-1370.
23. Gallo JR, Burgess JO, Ripps AH, Walker RS, Ireland EJ, Mercante DE, Davidson
JM. Three-year clinical evaluation of a compomer and a resin composite
as Class V filling materials. Oper Dent 2005;30:275-281.
24. Gwinnett AJ. Moist versus dry dentin: its effect on shear bond strength. Am
J Dent 1992;5:127-129.
25. Hansen EK, Asmussen E. A comparative study of dentin adhesives. Scand J
Dent Res 1985;93:280-287.
26. Helbig EB, Klimm HW, Schreger IE, Haufe E, Natusch I. Controlled clinical
study of the anterior composite-adhesive system Point 4/OptiBond Solo Plus.
Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2002;112:1230-1235.
27. Hoffmann-Axthelm W. History of Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence, 1976:
293-295.
28. Kanca J 3rd: Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence
Int 1992; 23:39-41.
29. Kramer IRH, McLean JW. The response of the human pulp to self-polymerising
acrylic. Br Dent J 1952;93:150-153.
30. Kubo S, Kawasaki K, Yokota H, Hayashi Y. Five-year clinical evaluation of two
adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 2006;34:97-105.
31. Mandras RS, Thurmond JW, Latta MA, Matranga LF, Kildee JM, Barkmeier
WW. Three-year clinical evaluation of the Clearfil Liner Bond system. Oper
Dent 1997;22:266-270.
32. Matis BA, Cochran MJ, Carlson TJ, Guba C, Eckert GJ. A three-year clinical
evaluation of two dentin bonding agents. J Am Dent Assoc 2004;135:451-
457.
33. McLean JW. Historical Overview: The pioneers of Enamel and dentin bonding.
In: Roulet J-F, Degrange M (eds). Adhesion – The silent revolution in dentistry.
Chicago: Quintessence, 2000;13-17.
34. Munksgaard EC, Assmussen E. Bond strength between dentin and restorative
resins mediated by a mixture of HEMA and glutaraldehyde. J Dent Res
1984;63:1087-1089.
35. Nakabayashi N, Kojima K, Masuhara E. The promotion of adhesion by the infiltration
of monomers into tooth substrates. J Biomed Mater Res 1982 ;
16:265-273.
36. Perdigao J, Carmo AR, Geraldeli S. Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of two
dentin adhesives applied on dry vs moist dentin. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:253-
258.
37. Servais Ge, Cartz L. Structure of zinc phosphate dental cement. J Dent Res
1971;50:613-620.
38. Silverstone LE, Dogon II. Proceedings of an international symposium on. The
Acid Etch Technique. St. Paul: North Central, 1975.
39. Söderholm KJ, Guelmann M, Bimstein E. Shear bond strength of one 4th and
two 7th generation bonding agents when used by operators with different
bonding experience. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:57-64.
40. Stanley HR, Going RE, Chauncey HH. Human pulp response to acid pretreatment
of dentin and to composite restoration. J Am Dent Assoc 1975;91:817-
825.
41. Türkün SL. Clinical evaluation of a self-etching and a one-bottle adhesive system
at two years. J Dent 2003;31:527-534.
42. van Dijken JW. Clinical evaluation of three adhesive systems in class V noncarious
lesions. Dent Mater 2000;16:285-291.
43. Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Evaluation of two
dentin adhesives in cervical lesions. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:672-673.
44. Van Meerbeek B, Kanumilli PV, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P,
Peumans M. A randomized, controlled trial evaluating the three-year clinical
effectiveness of two etch & rinse adhesives in cervical lesions. Oper Dent
2004;29:376-385.
230 The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry