Dentin Bonding Testing Using a Mini-interfacial Fracture Toughness Approach

Abstract

© International & American Associations for Dental Research 2016. Measurement of interfacial fracture toughness (iFT) is considered a more valid method to assess bonding effectiveness as compared with conventional bond strength testing. Common fracture toughness tests are, however, laborious and require a relatively bulky specimen size. This study aimed to evaluate a new simplified and miniaturized iFT (mini-iFT) test. Four dentin adhesives, representing the main adhesive classes, and 1 glass ionomer cement were applied onto flat dentin. Mini-iFT (1.5 × 2.0 × 16 to 18 mm) and microtensile bond strength (μTBS; 1.5 × 1.5 × 16 to 18 mm) specimens were prepared from the same tooth. For the mini-iFT specimens, a single notch was cut at the adhesive-dentin interface with a 150-μm diamond blade under water cooling; the specimens were loaded until failure in a 4-point bending test setup. Finite element analysis was used to analyze stress distribution during mini-iFT testing. The correlation between the mean mini-iFT and μTBS was examined and found to be significant; a strong positive correlation was found (r2 = 0.94, P = 0.004). Weibull data analysis suggested the mini-iFT to vary less than the μTBS. Both the mini-iFT and the μTBS revealed the same performance order, with the 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive outperforming the 2-step self-etch and 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesive, followed by the 1-step SE adhesive and, finally, the glass ionomer cement. Scanning electron microscopy failure analysis revealed the adhesive-dentin interface to fail more at the actual interface with the mini-iFT test, while μTBS specimens failed more within dentin and composite. This finding was corroborated by finite element analysis showing stress to concentrate at the interface during mini-iFT loading and crack propagation. In conclusion, the new mini-iFT test appeared more discriminative and valid than the μTBS to assess bonding effectiveness; the latter test nevertheless remains more versatile. Specimen size and workload were alike, making the mini-iFT test a valid alternative for the popular μTBS test.