Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online: 1860

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 23  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 373-377
Influence of ultrasound and diamond burs treatments on microtensile bond strength


Post-Graduate Program in Dentistry, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Eduardo Gonçalves Mota
Post-Graduate Program in Dentistry, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre
Brazil
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.102232

Rights and Permissions

Objective: To compare surface treatments with CVDentUS ® ultrasound tips (UT) and KGSorensen ® diamond burs (DB) on etched (e) and non-etched (n/e) dentin. The microtensile bond strength (μTBS) was measured and fractography was assessed by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and Methods: Sixteen molars were divided into four groups of four teeth each according to treatment (DB-n/e; DB-e; UT-n/e; UT-e). The teeth were restored, sectioned into samples for μTBS (n=40) and tested on a EMIC DL-2000 universal machine (0.5 mm/min) and analyzed by SEM for fracture classification. Statistical Analysis: For analysis of the data on μTBS, the two-way ANOVA, using treatment and acid etching as fixed factor, and the Tukey test were used (α=0.05). To failures classification in cohesive in dentin (CD); cohesive in composite resin (CC); cohesive interfacial on base or top of hybrid layer (CBT); cohesive in adhesive (CA); mixed (M); interfacial on smear layer (S) the Fisher's exact test (α=0.05) was performed. Results: The mean values of μTBS (in MPa) in the different groups were as follows: UT-e: 45.31±8.16; DB-e: 34.04±9.29; UT-n/e: 15.17±3.71; and DB-n/e: 9.86±3.80. On analysis of the SEM micrographs, the DB-n/e group showed total obstruction of dentinal tubules; the UT-n/e group showed partial desobstruction of dentinal tubules and irregular surface; the DB-e group showed complete desobstruction of dentinal tubules; and the UT-e group showed complete desobstruction of dentinal tubules and irregular surface. Conclusion: The combination of ultrasound treatment and acid etching provides high values of μTBS. An association exists between CA/CC failures and the UT method, CBT failure and the DB method, CBT/CC failures and etching, S failure and non-etching.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3274    
    Printed78    
    Emailed2    
    PDF Downloaded97    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal