ÜÇ FARKLI SELF-ETCH ADEZİVİN DEMİR SÜLFAT İLE KONTAMİNE SÜT DİŞİ DENTİNİNE BAĞLANMA DAYANIMLARININ KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Year 2017, , 67 - 72, 14.06.2017

Gülsüm Duruk Veli Alper Görgen Neslihan Kaya

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.321411

Abstract

Amaç: Bu
çalışmanın amacı demir sülfat ile kontamine süt dişi dentinine 3 farklı
self-etch adeziv sistemlerin asitli ve asitsiz uygulamalarını takiben
yerleştirilen kompomerin mikrogerilim bağlanma dayanımlarını değerlendirmektir.

Materyal-Metod:
45
adet çürüksüz insan süt II. azı dişinin kuronları, okluzalden dentin yüzeyi
açığa çıkacak şekilde yatay yönde uzaklaştırılmış ve eşit sayıda rastgele 3
gruba ayrılmıştır. Grup I: kontrol, Grup II: demir sülfatla kontamine, Grup III:
demir sülfatla kontamine asit uygulanan grup. 
Her bir grup kendi içinde 3 farklı adeziv ajan (Clearfil SE-Bond, 3M-ESPE
Single Bond Universal, Tokuyama Bond Force)
için 3 alt gruba ayrılmıştır. Grup II ve III’teki dişler insan kanıyla
kontamine edildikten sonra 30 sn demir sülfat uygulanmış ve 30 sn süreyle serum
fizyolojik ile yıkanmıştır. Grup III’e 
%34,5’ lik fosforik asit 15 sn uygulanmıştır. Tüm gruplara adeziv uygulaması
ve kompomer restorasyonu sonrası, dişler 1x1 mm kalınlığında kesilerek her
dişten 3’er adet test çubukları elde edilmiştir. Çubuklara mikrogerilim testi
uygulanmıştır. Oluşan kırık tipleri (adeziv, koheziv, karışık) steromikroskopta
belirlenmiştir. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde tek yönlü varyans analizi ve
Post-hoc çoklu karşılaştırma testleri kullanılmıştır.

Bulgular: En
düşük mikrogerilim değeri Grup II’de iken (p<0,05), en başarılı adeziv Grup
I ve II de Clearfil SE-Bond bulunmuştur.

Sonuç: Demir
sülfat, süt dişi dentininde self-etch adezivlerin bağlanma performansları
üzerine negatif etkiye sahip olup, asit uygulaması bu etkiyi azaltmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Bağlanma
dayanımı, demir sülfat, kontaminasyon.

COMPARING OF MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH OF THREE
DIFFERENT SELF-ETCH ADHESIVE SYSTEMS TO PRIMARY TOOTH DENTINE CONTAMINATED WITH FERRIC SULPHATE^≠

ABSTRACT

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile
bond strengths of compomer placed to primary dentin contaminated with ferric
sulphate following the application of three different acidic and acid-free
self-etch adhesive systems.

Materials
and method: 45
non-carious second primary molars human teeth were cut horizontally so as to be
released the occlusal dentin surface. Teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups
with equal numbers. Group I: control, Group II: contaminated with ferric
sulphate, Group III: exposed to acid contaminated with ferric sulphate. Each
group was divided into 3 subgroups for 3 different adhesive agents (Clearfil
SE-Bond, 3M-ESPE Single Bond Universal, Tokuyama Bond ForceII). After the teeth
were contaminated with human blood in group II and III, ferric sulphate was
applied to teeth for 30 seconds and they were rinsed with physiological se- rum
for 30 seconds. 34.5% phosphoric acid was applied to teeth in group 3 for 15
seconds. After the application of adhesive and compomer restoration to all
groups, 3 test
sticks from each tooth
were obtained by cutting the teeth to 1x1mm. Microtensile test was applied to
the strips and fracture types (adhesive, cohesive, mixed) obtained were
determined at stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and
Post-Hoc test.

Results:
The
lowest value of microtensile has been found in Group II (p<0.05). The most
successful adhesive was Clearfil SE-Bond in Group I and Group II.

Conclusion:
Ferric
sulphate has a negative effect on bonding performance of self-etch adhesives at
primary dentine and acidic applications reduce this effect.

Key
Words: Bond
strength, ferric sulphate, contamination

Keywords

Bağlanma dayanımı, demir sülfat

References

• 1. Prabhakar AR, Bedi S. Effect of glutaraldehyde and ferric sulfate on shear bond strength of adhesives to primary dentin. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2008;26:109-13.
• 2. Zarzar PA, Rosenblatt A, Takahashi CS, Takeuchi PL, Costa Junior LA. Formocresol mutagenicity following primary tooth pulp therapy: an in vivo study. J Dent 2003;31:479-85.
• 3. Fuks AB, Holan G, Davis JM, Eidelman E. Ferric sulfate versus dilute formocresol in pulpotomized primary molars: long-term follow up. Pediatr Dent 1997;19:327-30.
• 4. Salama FS. Influence of zinc-oxide eugenol, formocresol, and ferric sulfate on bond strength of dentin adhesives to primary teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2005;6:14-21.
• 5. Shalan H, Awad S, El-Fallal AA. Influence of pulpotomy medicaments on the ultrastructure and shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive to primary tooth dentin. Quintessence Int 2012; 43: 517-23.
• 6. Inoue S, Koshiro K, Yoshida Y, et al. Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 2005;84:1160-4.
• 7. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, Cadenaro M, Di Lenarda R, De Stefano Dorigo E. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater 2008;24:90-101.
• 8. Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Eight-year clinical evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel etching. Dent Mater 2010;26:1176-84.
• 9. Perdigao J, Carmo AR, Anauate-Netto C, et al. Clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive at 18 months. Am J Dent. 2005;18:135-40.
• 10. Keleş S, Derelioğlu S, Çelik P, Yılmaz Y. Demir Sülfat ile Kontamine Süt Dişi Dentininde Farklı Yüzey Uygulamalarının Kompomerin Mikro-Gerilimine Etkisi. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013; 2:159-64.
• 11. Kuphasuk W, Harnirattisai C, Senawongse P, Tagami J. Bond strengths of two adhesive systems to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic agent. Oper Dent 2007;32:399-405.
• 12. Land MF, Rosenstiel SF, Sandrik JL. Disturbance of the dentinal smear layer by acidic hemostatic agents. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:4-7.
• 13. Christoffersen MR, Thyregod HC, Christoffersen J. Effects of aluminum(III), chromium(III), and iron(III) on the rate of dissolution of calcium hydroxyapatite crystals in the absence and presence of the chelating agent desferrioxamine. Calcif Tissue Int 1987;41:27-30.
• 14. Selvig KA, Halse A. The ultrastructural localization of iron in rat incisor enamel. Scand J Dent Res 1975;83:88-95. 15. Kumar P, Shenoy A, Joshi S. The effect of various surface contaminants on the microleakage of two different generation bonding agents: A stereomicroscopic study. J Conserv Dent 2012;15:265-9.
• 16. Moszner N, Salz U, Zimmermann J. Chemical aspects of self-etching enamel-dentin adhesives: a systematic review. Dent Mater. 2005;21:895-910.
• 17. Perdigao J, Gomes G, Lopes MM. Influence of conditioning time on enamel adhesion. Quintessence Int 2006; 37: 35-41.
• 18. Ünlü N, Çetin AR, Cebe MA, Karabekiroğlu S. Farklı Adeziv Sistemlerin Hemostatik Ajanlarla Kontamine Edilen Dentin Yüzeylerine Mikro Gerilim Bağlanma Dayanımlarının Karșılaștırılması. Hacettepe Diş Hek Fak Derg 2010;34: 5-13.
• 19. Waidyasekera K, Nikaido T, Weerasinghe DS, Ichinose S, Tagami J. Reinforcement of dentin in self-etch adhesive technology: a new concept. J Dent 2009;37:604-9.
• 20. Yoshida Y, Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N, et al. Self-assembled Nano-layering at the Adhesive interface. J Dent Res 2012;91:376-81.
• 21. Barutcigil Ç, Barutcigil K, Kürklü D, Harorlı OT. Güncel Dentin Bağlayıcı Ajanların ve Uygulama Yöntemlerinin Makaslama Bağlanma Dayanımlarının Karşılaştırılması. İnönü Üniv Sağlık Bil Derg 2013;2:27-32.
• 22. Mitra SB, Lee CY, Bui HT, Tantbirojn D, Rusin RP. Long-term adhesion and mechanism of bonding of a paste-liquid resin-modified glass-ionomer. Dent Mater 2009;25:459-66.
• 23. Lin A, McIntyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on the adhesion of glass-ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res 1992;71:1836-41.
• 24. Munoz MA, Luque I, Hass V, Reis A, Loguercio AD, Bombarda NH. Immediate bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentine. J Dent 2013; 41: 404-11.
• 25. Atash R, Van den Abbeele A. Bond strengths of eight contemporary adhesives to enamel and to dentine: an in vitro study on bovine primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 2005;15:264-73.
• 26. Finger WJ, Lee KS, Podszun W. Monomers with low oxygen inhibition as enamel/dentin adhesives. Dent Mater 1996;12:256-61.
• 27. Cheng JT, Itoh K, Kusunoki M, Hasegawa T, Wakumoto S, Hisamitsu H. Effect of dentine conditioners on the bonding efficacy of one-bottle adhesives. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:28-33.
• 28. Şengün A, Yalçın M, Kocabasoglu A. Yedinci Jenerasyon Adeziv Sistemlerinin Dentine Makasla- ma Bağlanma Dayanımlarının Karşılastırılması. Atatürk Üniv Dis Hek Fak Derg 2009;19:156-60.