Bonding to Dentin Contaminated with Ceramic-Repair Primers/Etchants
| dc.contributor.author | Limvisitsakul A. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Likhitthaworn T. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kaophun S. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Van Meerbeek B. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pongprueksa P. | |
| dc.contributor.correspondence | Limvisitsakul A. | |
| dc.contributor.other | Mahidol University | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-05-07T18:19:14Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-05-07T18:19:14Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2025-01-01 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Purpose: To evaluate bonding to dentin contaminated with primers/etchants used for adjacent ceramic repair. Materials and Methods: Mid-coronal dentin of sound human third molars was exposed and allocated to 10 experimental groups. The universal adhesive (UA) Single Bond Universal (“SBU,” 3M Oral Care), applied either in etch-and-rinse (E&R) or self-etch (SE) bonding mode, and the considered gold-standard SE adhesive Clearfil SE Bond X (“CSE,” Kuraray Noritake) were bonded to dentin contaminated with either Monobond Etch & Prime (“MEP,” Ivoclar) or IPS Ceramic Etching Gel (“HF,” Ivoclar) following 10 scenarios: phosphoric acid (PA)+SBU<inf>E&R</inf> (uncontaminated E&R UA control), HF+PA+SBU<inf>E&R</inf>, MEP+PA+SBU<inf>E&R</inf>, PA+MEP+SBU<inf>E&R</inf>, SBU<inf>SE</inf> (uncontaminated SE UA control), HF+SBU<inf>SE</inf>, MEP+SBU<inf>SE</inf>, CSE<inf>SE</inf> (uncontaminated SE control), HF+CSE<inf>SE</inf>, MEP+CSE<inf>SE</inf>. Upon adhesive and composite application, the specimens were stored in artificial saliva at 37°C. After 1 week, all specimens were sectioned into resin-bonded dentin sticks, which were randomly distributed over two groups to be subjected to a microtensile bond-strength test immediately at 1 week or upon aging by storage in artificial saliva for 6 months. Statistics involved linear mixed-effects modeling with Bonferroni correction (P <0.05). Results: E&R bonding to dentin contaminated with MEP or HF did not significantly differ from bonding to non-contaminated dentin (controls). However, SE bonding to MEP- and HF-contaminated dentin was significantly less effective than to non-contaminated dentin (controls). Aging for 6 months did not reduce E&R bonding as compared to the 1-week data, while SE bonding was significantly less effective upon 6-month aging. E&R bonding was affected more when dentin was contaminated with MEP before phosphoric acid (PA) etching than when dentin was contaminated with MEP after PA etching. Conclusions: Dentin contamination with MEP and HF impacted self-etch (SE) bonding but not etch&rinse (E&R) bonding. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Adhesive Dentistry Vol.27 (2025) , 221-230 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.3290/j.jad.c_2336 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 17579988 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 14615185 | |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 41231395 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-105021879053 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/116560 | |
| dc.rights.holder | SCOPUS | |
| dc.subject | Dentistry | |
| dc.title | Bonding to Dentin Contaminated with Ceramic-Repair Primers/Etchants | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| mu.datasource.scopus | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=105021879053&origin=inward | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 230 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 221 | |
| oaire.citation.title | Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | |
| oaire.citation.volume | 27 | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | KU Leuven– University Hospital Leuven | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Mahidol University, Faculty of Dentistry |
