Application of a New Microtensile Bond Strength Testing Technique for the Evaluation of Enamel Bonding.

Ji Hao Sun, Fei Chen, Koji Kanefuji, Abu Faem Mohammad Almas Chowdhury, Ricardo Marins Carvalho, Hidehiko Sano
{"title":"Application of a New Microtensile Bond Strength Testing Technique for the Evaluation of Enamel Bonding.","authors":"Ji Hao Sun,&nbsp;Fei Chen,&nbsp;Koji Kanefuji,&nbsp;Abu Faem Mohammad Almas Chowdhury,&nbsp;Ricardo Marins Carvalho,&nbsp;Hidehiko Sano","doi":"10.3290/j.cjdr.b1965031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate adhesives' enamel bonding performance utilising the traditional microtensile bond strength test (µTBST) and a new double-sided microtensile bond strength test (DµTBST) to assess the suitability of the latter.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 'tug-of-war' direct encounter design was employed to compare the enamel bond strengths of two universal adhesives and their different application modes simultaneously under the same tensile load applied to double-sided bonded specimens. Clearfil Universal Bond (CU; Kuraray, Kurashiki, Japan) and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SB; 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) were applied in self-etch (S) and etch-and-rinse (E) mode on 110 human molar samples to perform two experiments. Experiment 1 compared the enamel bond strengths of the combinations of adhesive application modes utilising µTBST. The data were analysed using a Welch analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by a Games-Howell test. Experiment 2 employed DµTBST to determine the suitability of the new double-sided bonded assembly and ascertain which of the adhesive application mode combinations was superior. The data were analysed using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, followed by pairwise comparisons with a Mantel-Cox log-rank test. The level of significance was set at P ˂ 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The µTBST results did not show significant differences for CUE vs CUS, SBE vs SBS, CUS vs SBS and CUS vs SBE (P ˃ 0.05); however, from DµTBST, the survival distributions for the interventions were statistically significantly different (χ2(3) = 145.130, P ˂ 0.0005), indicating the superiority of universal adhesive CU over SB and application mode E over S with certainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DµTBST was able to add more discerning outcomes to the µTBST results, indicating that the new technique could become a valuable adjunct to the conventional method.</p>","PeriodicalId":74983,"journal":{"name":"The Chinese journal of dental research : the official journal of the Scientific Section of the Chinese Stomatological Association (CSA)","volume":"24 3","pages":"159-166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Chinese journal of dental research : the official journal of the Scientific Section of the Chinese Stomatological Association (CSA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.cjdr.b1965031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate adhesives' enamel bonding performance utilising the traditional microtensile bond strength test (µTBST) and a new double-sided microtensile bond strength test (DµTBST) to assess the suitability of the latter.

Methods: A 'tug-of-war' direct encounter design was employed to compare the enamel bond strengths of two universal adhesives and their different application modes simultaneously under the same tensile load applied to double-sided bonded specimens. Clearfil Universal Bond (CU; Kuraray, Kurashiki, Japan) and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SB; 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) were applied in self-etch (S) and etch-and-rinse (E) mode on 110 human molar samples to perform two experiments. Experiment 1 compared the enamel bond strengths of the combinations of adhesive application modes utilising µTBST. The data were analysed using a Welch analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by a Games-Howell test. Experiment 2 employed DµTBST to determine the suitability of the new double-sided bonded assembly and ascertain which of the adhesive application mode combinations was superior. The data were analysed using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, followed by pairwise comparisons with a Mantel-Cox log-rank test. The level of significance was set at P ˂ 0.05.

Results: The µTBST results did not show significant differences for CUE vs CUS, SBE vs SBS, CUS vs SBS and CUS vs SBE (P ˃ 0.05); however, from DµTBST, the survival distributions for the interventions were statistically significantly different (χ2(3) = 145.130, P ˂ 0.0005), indicating the superiority of universal adhesive CU over SB and application mode E over S with certainty.

Conclusion: DµTBST was able to add more discerning outcomes to the µTBST results, indicating that the new technique could become a valuable adjunct to the conventional method.

新型微拉伸粘结强度测试技术在牙釉质粘结评价中的应用。
目的:采用传统的微拉伸粘结强度试验(µTBST)和新型的双面微拉伸粘结强度试验(DµTBST)评价胶粘剂的牙釉质粘接性能,评价双面微拉伸粘结强度试验的适用性。方法:采用“拔河”直接接触设计,比较两种通用胶粘剂在相同拉伸载荷下对双面粘接试样的牙釉质粘接强度及不同使用方式。Clearfil通用债券(CU;Kuraray, Kurashiki,日本)和Scotchbond通用粘合剂(SB;3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA)采用自蚀刻(S)和蚀刻-冲洗(E)模式对110个人体摩尔样品进行两项实验。实验1利用µTBST比较不同粘结方式组合的牙釉质粘接强度。使用Welch方差分析(ANOVA)对数据进行分析,然后进行Games-Howell检验。实验2采用DµTBST来确定新的双面粘接组件的适用性,并确定哪种粘接模式组合更优。采用Kaplan-Meier生存分析对数据进行分析,随后采用Mantel-Cox log-rank检验进行两两比较。显著性水平为P小于0.05。结果:CUE与CUS、SBE与SBS、CUS与SBS、CUS与SBE的µTBST结果差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05);然而,从DµTBST来看,干预措施的生存分布差异有统计学意义(χ2(3) = 145.130, P小于0.0005),这表明通用粘接CU优于SB,应用模式E优于S。结论:DµTBST能够在µTBST结果的基础上增加更多的识别结果,表明新技术可以成为传统方法的有价值的补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信