Journal of oral biology and craniofacial research · 2026
Effect of surface preparation methods on the shear bond strength of universal and self-etch adhesive systems: an in vitro study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Verma Shiwangi, Suman Ravishankar, Goud Rajendra, Das Snigdho, Gollapudi Srikant, Routray Samapika
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of three smear layer preparation methods on shear bond strength (SBS) to enamel and dentin, using two universal adhesives (Tetric N-Bond Universal, 3M Single Bond Universal) and one two-step self-etch adhesive (Kuraray Clearfil SE Bond).
METHODS: Ninety extracted premolars were assigned to enamel and dentin groups (n = 45 each) and prepared with coarse grit (120), fine grit (600) silicon carbide paper, or air abrasion (Aluminium Oxide for enamel, Sylc for dentin). Surfaces were bonded with one of the adhesives and restored with composite. Enamel was treated in an etch-and-rinse mode, dentin in self-etch mode. SBS was tested using a universal testing machine. Failure surfaces were examined under SEM to assess fracture morphology and EDS to determine elemental composition. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA/Tukey's post-hoc test and Weibull statistics (P ≤ 0.05).
RESULTS: In enamel, SBS generally increased from coarse to fine to air abrasion. Kuraray Clearfil SE Bond yielded the highest values, particularly with air abrasion (9.11 ± 0.51 MPa). In dentin, fine grit achieved the highest SBS across all adhesives, followed by air abrasion; coarse grit showed the lowest. Kuraray consistently outperformed the universal adhesives in most dentin conditions. SEM/EDS revealed predominantly adhesive failures; occasional cohesive failures in dentin (Ivoclar) and enamel (Kuraray) corresponded with higher SBS and Weibull reliability.
CONCLUSION: Both surface preparation and adhesive type significantly influence SBS. Kuraray showed superior performance and reliability, while fine grit and air abrasion enhanced bonding efficacy. SEM/EDS findings corroborated the mechanical results.
METHODS: Ninety extracted premolars were assigned to enamel and dentin groups (n = 45 each) and prepared with coarse grit (120), fine grit (600) silicon carbide paper, or air abrasion (Aluminium Oxide for enamel, Sylc for dentin). Surfaces were bonded with one of the adhesives and restored with composite. Enamel was treated in an etch-and-rinse mode, dentin in self-etch mode. SBS was tested using a universal testing machine. Failure surfaces were examined under SEM to assess fracture morphology and EDS to determine elemental composition. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA/Tukey's post-hoc test and Weibull statistics (P ≤ 0.05).
RESULTS: In enamel, SBS generally increased from coarse to fine to air abrasion. Kuraray Clearfil SE Bond yielded the highest values, particularly with air abrasion (9.11 ± 0.51 MPa). In dentin, fine grit achieved the highest SBS across all adhesives, followed by air abrasion; coarse grit showed the lowest. Kuraray consistently outperformed the universal adhesives in most dentin conditions. SEM/EDS revealed predominantly adhesive failures; occasional cohesive failures in dentin (Ivoclar) and enamel (Kuraray) corresponded with higher SBS and Weibull reliability.
CONCLUSION: Both surface preparation and adhesive type significantly influence SBS. Kuraray showed superior performance and reliability, while fine grit and air abrasion enhanced bonding efficacy. SEM/EDS findings corroborated the mechanical results.