We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry



Forgotten password?


J Adhes Dent 22 (2020), No. 1     14. Feb. 2020
J Adhes Dent 22 (2020), No. 1  (14.02.2020)

Page 85-97, doi:10.3290/j.jad.a44000, PubMed:32030379

Structural/Chemical Characterization and Bond Strength of a New Self-Adhesive Bulk-fill Restorative
Yao, Chenmin / Ahmed, Mohammed H. / Zhang, Fei / Mercelis, Ben / Van Landuyt, Kirsten L. / Huang, Cui / Van Meerbeek, Bart
Purpose: The material structure and chemical elemental composition of a new self-adhesive composite hybrid were investigated. The bonding performance when applied on flat (FLAT) vs high C-factor class-I cavity-bottom (CAVITY) dentin and in light-cure (LC) vs self-cure (SC) mode was determined.
Materials and Methods: The self-adhesive bulk-fill composite Surefil One (Su-O; Dentsply Sirona) was compared with the resin-modified glass-ionomer Fuji II LC Improved (Fuji2LC; GC) and the ion-releasing alkasite material Cention N (CentionN; Ivoclar Vivadent). The material structure was examined with SEM and TEM, while the chemical elemental composition was analyzed using EDS. The immediate and aged microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of Su-O_LC/SC was compared to that of Fuji2LC applied without any pre-treatment, and to that of CentionN applied following bonding with Adhese Universal (AU) (Ivoclar Vivadent) in self-etch mode (AU/CentionN). All restorative materials were bonded onto FLAT and CAVITY dentin. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test.
Results: EDS analysis revealed that Su-O was richer in C and P than the reference restorative materials. Applied to FLAT dentin, the significantly highest immediate and aged μTBS were recorded for AU/CentionN, which were not significantly different only from Su-O_LC. Applied to CAVITY dentin, the significantly highest immediate μTBS was recorded for AU/CentionN, which did not differ significantly only from Su-O_SC. Su-O_LC bonded to CAVITY dentin suffered from a high incidence of pre-test failures.
Conclusion: While Su-O_LC bonded effectively and durably to FLAT dentin, Su-O_SC bonded more favorably than Su-O_LC in class-I cavities, which was probably related to shrinkage stress variously challenging the respective bond.

Keywords: adhesion, aging, composite, curing, EDS, TEM