BMC oral health · 2026
Commercial trends in universal adhesive evolution: updated formulations do not consistently improve dentin bond strength after aging compared with predecessors and a multistep reference.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Abdel-Gawad Sarah, Le-Goff Stephane, Dursun Elisabeth, D'Agostino Maria-Antonietta, Orgueil Valentine, Bacon Charline, Moreau Ludovic, Lavoix Laetitia, Ceinos Romain, Attal Jean-Pierre, François Philippe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether recent commercial evolutions of universal adhesives improve dentin bond strength after aging and interfacial characteristics compared with predecessor formulations and a multistep reference.
METHODS: Three updated universal adhesives (AFB-00, Scotchbond Universal Plus, and Clearfil Universal Quick 2) and their respective predecessors (G-Premio Bond, Scotchbond Universal, and Clearfil Universal Quick) were evaluated. OptiBond FL served as a multistep etch-and-rinse reference. One hundred eighty human molars were prepared to expose mid-coronal dentin surfaces and assigned to 15 groups (n = 12 per group). Adhesives were applied in self-etch (SE1) or etch-and-rinse (ER2) modes according to the applicable manufacturers' instructions. The macroshear bond strength (SBS) was measured after 6 months of storage in water. Failure modes were recorded, and representative samples were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to assess the interfacial morphology and adhesive layer thickness. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: After aging, SBS differed among protocols. AFB-00 and Clearfil Universal Quick 2 performed comparably to their predecessors, whereas Scotchbond Universal Plus showed a significantly lower SBS than Scotchbond Universal. Most universal adhesive protocols showed SBS values comparable or superior to the multistep reference, except Clearfil Universal Quick and Clearfil Universal Quick 2 in self-etch mode. SEM revealed strategy-dependent interfacial patterns and marked differences in adhesive film thickness, particularly for AFB-00 without air drying.
CONCLUSIONS: Recent commercial evolutions of universal adhesives did not systematically improve dentin bond strength after aging. The observed modifications primarily affected the interfacial morphology and adhesive thickness rather than demonstrating consistently higher SBS values after aging. For clinicians, these findings suggest that commercial evolutions of universal adhesives may reflect distinct formulation strategies rather than incremental improvements, and that the performance of updated materials cannot be assumed from that of their predecessors.
METHODS: Three updated universal adhesives (AFB-00, Scotchbond Universal Plus, and Clearfil Universal Quick 2) and their respective predecessors (G-Premio Bond, Scotchbond Universal, and Clearfil Universal Quick) were evaluated. OptiBond FL served as a multistep etch-and-rinse reference. One hundred eighty human molars were prepared to expose mid-coronal dentin surfaces and assigned to 15 groups (n = 12 per group). Adhesives were applied in self-etch (SE1) or etch-and-rinse (ER2) modes according to the applicable manufacturers' instructions. The macroshear bond strength (SBS) was measured after 6 months of storage in water. Failure modes were recorded, and representative samples were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to assess the interfacial morphology and adhesive layer thickness. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: After aging, SBS differed among protocols. AFB-00 and Clearfil Universal Quick 2 performed comparably to their predecessors, whereas Scotchbond Universal Plus showed a significantly lower SBS than Scotchbond Universal. Most universal adhesive protocols showed SBS values comparable or superior to the multistep reference, except Clearfil Universal Quick and Clearfil Universal Quick 2 in self-etch mode. SEM revealed strategy-dependent interfacial patterns and marked differences in adhesive film thickness, particularly for AFB-00 without air drying.
CONCLUSIONS: Recent commercial evolutions of universal adhesives did not systematically improve dentin bond strength after aging. The observed modifications primarily affected the interfacial morphology and adhesive thickness rather than demonstrating consistently higher SBS values after aging. For clinicians, these findings suggest that commercial evolutions of universal adhesives may reflect distinct formulation strategies rather than incremental improvements, and that the performance of updated materials cannot be assumed from that of their predecessors.