Impact of Adhesive Application Modes on Shear Bond Strength of Resin Composites to Biodentine

Abstract

Purpose: This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength of different resin composites to Biodentine. Materials & Methods: Sixty acrylic blocks with a central hole (2mmx5mm) were fabricated(n=60). The holes were filled with Biodentine(Septodont), and the samples were randomly divided into three groups based on the type of restorative material: 1)Conventional posterior composite, Estelite Posterior Quick (EP)(Tokuyama); 2) Bulk-fill composite, Filtek Bulk Fill (FB)(3M ESPE); and 3) Short fiber-reinforced composite, EverX Posterior (EX)(GC). Additionally, each group was subdivided into two categories depending on the adhesive application method: self-etch and total-etch. A universal adhesive(Single Bond Universal,3M ESPE) was applied to the Biodentine specimens. Subsequently, the resin composites were applied and light-cured for 20 seconds. The shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine (AGS-1000D, Shimadzu) at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The shear bond strength data (MPa) were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and the Bonferroni test(p<0.05). Results: In the self-etch mode, a statistically significant difference was observed among the groups(p= 0.005). Group EP exhibited higher shear bond strength compared to Group FB. The total-etch mode also revealed significant differences among the groups(p = 0.009), with Group EP again showing the highest shear bond strength. However, when comparing the two etching modes within each group, there was no significant difference in shear bond strength. Conclusion: The conventional posterior composite significantly affects the shear bond strength to Biodentine. In contrast, the choice between self-etch and total-etch modes does not demonstrate a notable impact on the bond strength.

Keywords

• biodentine
• short fiber reinforced composite
• bulk fill
• shear bond strength

References

1. Iaculli F, Rodríguez-Lozano FJ, Briseño-Marroquín B, Wolf TG, Spagnuolo G, Rengo S. Vital pulp therapy of permanent teeth with reversible or irreversible pulpitis: an overview of the liter- ature. J Clin Med. 2022;11(14):4016. doi:10.3390/jcm11144016.
2. Bhavya B, Sadique M, Simon EP, Ravi S, Lal S. Spectrophotomet- ric analysis of coronal discoloration induced by white mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine: An: in vitro: study. J Conserv Dent. 2017;20(4):237–240. doi:10.4103/0972-0707.219203.
3. Camilleri J, Sorrentino F, Damidot D. Investigation of the hydra- tion and bioactivity of radiopacified tricalcium silicate cement, Biodentine and MTA Angelus. Dent Mater. 2013;29(5):580–593. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2013.03.007.
4. Kahler B, Taha N, Lu J, Saoud T. Vital pulp therapy for per- manent teeth with diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis: bio- logical basis and outcome. Aust Dent J. 2023;68:S110–S122. doi:10.1111/adj.12997.
5. Arbildo-Vega HI, Lapinska B, Panda S, Lamas-Lara C, Khan AS, Lukomska-Szymanska M. Clinical effectiveness of bulk- fill and conventional resin composite restorations: system- atic review and meta-analysis. Polymers. 2020;12(8):1786. doi:10.3390/polym12081786.
6. 6. Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, Nixon P. Bulk-fill resin- based composite restorative materials: a review. Br Dent J. 2017;222(5):337–344. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.214.
7. 7. Alshabib A, Jurado CA, Tsujimoto A. Short fiber-reinforced resin-based composites (SFRCs); Current status and fu- ture perspectives. Dent Mater J. 2022;41(5):647–654. doi:10.4012/dmj.2022-080.
8. 8. Da Rosa WLDO, Piva E, da Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015;43(7):765–776. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2015.04.003.

9. 9. El Meligy OAES, Alamoudi NM, Allazzam SM, El-Housseiny AAM. Biodentine TM versus formocresol pulpotomy technique in primary molars: a 12–month randomized controlled clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2019;19:1–8. doi:10.1186/s12903-018- 0702-4.
10. 10. Alqahtani AS, Sulimany AM, Alayad AS, Alqahtani AS, Bawazir OA. Evaluation of the shear bond strength of four bioceramic materials with different restorative materials and timings. Ma- terials. 2022;15(13):4668.
11. 11. Kaptan A, Oznurhan F, Candan M. In vitro comparison of surface roughness, flexural, and microtensile strength of various glass-ionomer-based materials and a new alkasite restorative material. Polymers. 2023;15(3):650. doi:10.3390/polym15030650.
12. 12. Cardoso PE, Braga RR, Carrilho MR. Evaluation of micro- tensile, shear and tensile tests determining the bond strength of three adhesive systems. Dent Mater. 1998;14(6):394–398. doi:10.1016/s0300-5712(99)00012-3.
13. 13. Carretero V, Giner-Tarrida L, Peñate L, Arregui M. Shear bond strength of nanohybrid composite to biodentine with three different adhesives. Coatings. 2019;9(12):783. doi:10.3390/coatings9120783.
14. 14. Bachoo I, Seymour D, Brunton P. A biocompatible and bioac- tive replacement for dentine: is this a reality? The proper- ties and uses of a novel calcium-based cement. Br Dent J. 2013;214(2):E5–E5. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.57.
15. 15. Karadas M, Cantekin K, Gumus H, Ateş SM, Duymuş ZY. Eval- uation of the bond strength of different adhesive agents to a resin-modified calcium silicate material (TheraCal LC). Scan- ning. 2016;38(5):403–411. doi:10.1002/sca.21284.
16. 16. Abdullah HA, Al-Ibraheemi ZA, Hanoon ZA, Haider J. Evalu- ation of Shear Bond Strength of Resin-Based Composites to Biodentine with Three Types of Seventh-Generation Bonding Agents: An In Vitro Study. Int J Dent. 2022;2022(1):2830299. doi:10.1155/2022/2830299.
17. 17. Odabaş ME, Bani M, Tirali RE. Shear bond strengths of dif- ferent adhesive systems to biodentine. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013;2013(1):626103. doi:10.1155/2013/626103.
18. 18. Altunsoy M, Tanrıver M, Ok E, Kucukyilmaz E. Shear bond strength of a self-adhering flowable composite and a flowable base composite to mineral trioxide aggregate, calcium-enriched mixture cement, and Biodentine. J Endod. 2015;41(10):1691–1695. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.008.
19. 19. Scheirs J. Compositional and failure analysis of polymers: a practical approach. John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
20. 20. Tezvergil A, Lassila L, Vallittu P. The shear bond strength of bidirectional and random-oriented fibre-reinforced com- posite to tooth structure. J Dent. 2005;33(6):509–516. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2004.11.016.
21. 21. Ipek I, Karaağaç Eskibağlar B, Yildiz S, Ataş O, Ünal M. Analy- sis of the bond strength between conventional, putty or resin- modified calcium silicate cement and bulk fill composites. Aust Dent J. 2023;68(4):265–272. doi:10.1111/adj.12977.
22. 22. Yesilyurt C, Ceyhanli KT, ALP CK, Yildirim T, TASDEMiR T. In vitro bonding effectiveness of new self-adhering flowable composite to calcium silicate-based material. Dent Mater J. 2014;33(3):319–324. doi:10.4012/dmj.2013-211.
23. 23. Ünal M. The comparison of shear bond strenght of different bulk-fill composites to a bioactive dentine substitute. Cumhuriyet Dent J. 2018;21(4):274–283. doi:10.7126/cumudj.433716.
24. 24. Palma PJ, Marques JA, Falacho RI, Vinagre A, Santos JM, Ramos JC. Does delayed restoration improve shear bond strength of dif- ferent restorative protocols to calcium silicate-based cements? Materials. 2018;11(11):2216. doi:10.3390/ma11112216.
25. 25. Meraji N, Camilleri J. Bonding over Dentin Re- placement Materials. J Endod. 2017;43(8):1343–1349. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2017.03.025.