Influence of thermal and mechanical load cycling on microtensile bond strengths of total and self-etching adhesive systems

Abstract

This study evaluated the influence of different thermal (TC) and mechanical (MC) cycling protocols on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) to cervical dentin margins of Class II restorations using two total-etch (TE) adhesives and one self-etching (SE) primer. Class II slot cavities were prepared on the mesial surfaces of 168 bovine incisors and were divided into three groups according to the bonding system used: Single Bond, OptiBond Solo Plus and Clearfil SE Bond. All cavities were restored with Filtek Z250 composite. Following restorative procedures, the restored teeth were allocated to seven subgroups (n=8) according to the thermal/mechanical protocol performed: G1-control (no cycling), G2-100,000 MC, G3-200,000 MC, G4-500,000 MC, G5-100,000 MC+1,000 TC, G6-200,000 MC+1,000 TC, G7-500,000 MC+1,000 TC. TC was performed using 5 ± 2°C and 55 ± 2°C baths, with a dwell time of 60 seconds in each bath. MC was achieved with an axial force of 80 N at 2 cycles/second. The restorations were sectioned perpendicular to the cervical bonded interface into two 0.8-1-mm thick slabs. The slabs were trimmed at the interface to obtain a cross-sectional surface area of 0.8-1 mm2. All specimens were then subjected to μTBS (v=0.5 mm/minute). Fracture mode analysis was performed using SEM. Bond strength mean values (MPa) were analyzed with ANOVA 3-way and Tukey's test (α=5%). Dunnett's test was used to compare tested groups against Control groups of each adhesive system (α=5%). SE primer presented lower mean bond strength values when compared to TE adhesives (p=0.05). In addition, specimens restored with the SE primer did not resist to the 200,000 and 500,000 MC associated with TC. The application of 100,000 MC did not present a significant decrease in bond strength when compared to the control. Mixed failures were predominant for all groups. The higher the amount of thermal/mechanical cycles, the greater the number of mixed failures and the lower the percentage of adhesive failures. ©Operative Dentistry, 2006.