THE JOURNAL OF - Dentsply

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Blunck/Zaslansky 0 20 40 60 80 100 % + Syntac OptiBond FL Clearfil SE Bond a. MQ1 results after 2 nd TC enamel + + * * * Prompt L-Pop 1999 Prompt L-Pop 2000 Adper Prompt L-Pop / Tetric Ceram Adper Prompt L-Pop / Filtek Z250 Xeno III / Quixfil Xeno III / Tetric Ceram Xeno III / Dyract eXtra Futurabond NR One-up Bond F Plus AQ Bond iBond G-Bond Hybrid Bond tri-S bond + Syntac OptiBond FL Clearfil SE Bond b. MQ1 results after 3 rd TC enamel + Prompt L-Pop 1999 Prompt L-Pop 2000 Adper Prompt L-Pop / Tetric Ceram Adper Prompt L-Pop / Filtek Z250 0 20 40 6 0 80 * 100 % Xeno III / Tetric Ceram Xeno III / Dyract eXtra AQ Bond iBond Fig 1 Results of marginal quality 1 in % relative to the enamel margin length in Class V cavities for self-etching adhesive systems after (a) 1-year water storage and a 2nd TC and (b) after after 3- year water storage and a 3rd TC (o and + = outliers, * = statistically significantly different compared to Syntac, Opti Bond FL, and Clearfil SE Bond, p < 0.05). weighted by the SE) through the six MQ1 data points for every product. The slopes of these regression lines, as well as the 95% confidence intervals and r 2 values are also shown in Table 3 (columns I to L), and they provide an overall estimate of the trend for the deterioration of the MQ1 results for each product. A general linear deterioration was observed for all groups (see example plots in Fig 3), which shows that the deterioration rate is not consistent over time. Furthermore, for all the products, the overall trend (column I) only occasionally corresponds to the trend of the intermediate segments (columns A, C, E, and G in Table 3). Finally, to better understand how well the data from the first year can be used to predict the trend in the performance of each product over a period of 3 years, the trends of T1 - T4 were calculated and used to derive a percent deviation estimate relative to the regressed overall trend (the difference divided by the slope of the overall trend as %, shown in Table 3, column M). Note that for some of the products (Opti- Bond FL, AQ Bond, Prompt L Pop 2000, Adper Prompt L Pop, and Xeno III) a reasonable (≤ 10%) prediction was found, while for others, deviations of 20%, 30% or even 40% exist. DISCUSSION Effectiveness of adhesive systems can be generally judged by the marginal adaptation of composite resin restorations at the interface with the tooth substrate. Marginal adaptation is affected by many different parameters. These might be greatly influenced by the inherent properties of the restorative material, such as shrinkage and shrinkage stress, 24 the chemistry of the adhesive system used, the size 234 The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry
Blunck/Zaslansky 0 20 40 60 80 100 % Syntac Optibond FL Clearfil SE Bond a. MQ1 results after 1 st TC dentin + Prompt L-Pop (1999) Prompt L-Pop (2000) Adper Prompt L-Pop / Tetric Ceram Adper Prompt L-Pop / Filtek Z250 Xeno III / Dyract eXtra Xeno III / Quixfil Xeno III / Tetric Ceram Futurabond NR One Up Bond F Plus AQ Bond iBond Hybrid Bond G-Bond tri-S bond Syntac OptiBond FL Clearfil SE Bond b. MQ1 results after 2 nd TC dentin * * * Prompt L-Pop 1999 Prompt L-Pop 2000 Adper Prompt L-Pop / Tetric Ceram Adper Prompt L-Pop / Filtek Z250 Xeno III / Dyract eXtra Xeno III / Quixfil Xeno III / Tetric Ceram Futurabond NR One-up Bond F-Plus AQ Bond iBond Hybrid Bond G-Bond tri-S bond Fig 2 Marginal quality 1 results in % of the dentin margin length in Class V cavities for all-in-one adhesive systems after (a) 21 days of water storage and a 1st TC, after (b) 1 year of water storage and a 2nd TC, and (c) after after 3 years of water storage and a 3rd TC (o and + = outliers, * = statistically significantly different compared to Syntax, OptiBond FL, and Clearfil SE Bond p < 0.05). c. MQ1 results after 3 rd TC dentin 0 20 40 + 6 0 + 80 * * 100 % Syntac OptiBond FL Clearfil SE Bond Prompt L-Pop 1999 Prompt L-Pop 2000 Adper Prompt L-Pop / Tetric Ceram Adper Prompt L-Pop / Filtek Z250 Xeno III / Dyract eXtra Xeno III / Tetric Ceram AQ Bond iBond of the cavity, the c-factor, 9 the insertion technique, and the polymerization protocol. 1 In this study, a high resolution quantitative marginal analysis method was used to evaluate the marginal adaptation of composite resin restorations over a long period of water storage followed by TC. This quantification method relies on imaging of precision replicas of restored teeth with a scanning electron microscope, followed by quantitative quality analysis of the entire margin length. The replica technique is non-destructive to the natural-tooth samples; hence, the margins can be assessed and marginal defects detected and compared at different times, as well as after applying different stresses to the tooth specimens. The high sensitivity of this method, due to the SEM's excellent detail reproduction, is a great advantage for the evaluation of such bonding of adhesive systems. 4,26 The results (Figs 1 and 2) show a distribution of the MQ1 results of the restoration margins at different stages of the Vol 9, Supplement 2, 2007 235
Page 1 and 2: THE JOURNAL OF ADHESIVE DENTISTRY V
Page 3 and 4: Guest Editorial Satellite Symposium
Page 5 and 6: THE JOURNAL OF ADHESIVE DENTISTRY C
Page 7 and 8: Dental Adhesives …. How it All St
Page 9 and 10: Söderholm resulted in a new genera
Page 11 and 12: Effectiveness of All-in-one Adhesiv
Page 13: Blunck/Zaslansky composites were us
Page 17 and 18: Blunck/Zaslansky Table 3 Slopes of
Page 19 and 20: Blunk/Zaslansky many of the product
Page 21 and 22: Clinical Bonding of a Single-step S
Page 23 and 24: van Dijken et al DISCUSSION The rap
Page 25 and 26: Shear Bond Strength and Physicochem
Page 27 and 28: Latta Fig 1 Representative spectra
Page 29 and 30: Microshear Fatigue Testing of Tooth
Page 31 and 32: Braem Fig 1 Positioning of the dent
Page 33 and 34: Braem the number of steps but also
Page 35 and 36: Microleakage of Class V Composite R
Page 37 and 38: Rosales-Leal Fig 1 Percentage of ca
Page 39 and 40: Rosales-Leal fect the occlusal seal
Page 41 and 42: Microleakage of XP Bond in Class II
Page 43 and 44: Manhart/Trumm heim, Germany), resul
Page 45 and 46: Six-month Clinical Evaluation of XP
Page 47 and 48: Blunck et al Table 2 Results of the
Page 49 and 50: Adhesive Luting Revisited: Influenc
Page 51 and 52: Frankenberger et al Table 2 Results
Page 53 and 54: Frankenberger et al or resin coatin
Page 55 and 56: XP BOND in Self-curing Mode used fo
Page 57 and 58: Raffaelli et al Table 2 Bond streng
Page 59 and 60: XP BOND in Self-curing mode used fo
Page 61 and 62: Ferrari et al Table 2 Performance c
Page 63: Sarrett Vol 9, Supplement 1, 2007 2

THE JOURNAL OF - Dentsply

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?