RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the influence of thermo-mechanical cycling (TMC) on the bond strength (BS) of a universal adhesive system (UAS - Adper Single Bond Universal, 3M ESPE) to dentin treated or not with 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX). METHODS: Eighty human molars were flattened until reach the dentin and separated into 4 groups according to the bonding protocol: ENR Group: 37% phosphoric acid + 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system (ENR); UAS Group: UAS in self-etch mode; ENR + CHX Group: 37% phosphoric acid + CHX + ENR; UAS + CHX Group: CHX + UAS in self-etch mode. After treatments, teeth were restored (Filtek Z350, 3M ESPE). Samples (n = 10) were submitted to aging process: stored in distilled water at 37°C/30 days or TMC (ERIOS - 98N/1.6Hz + thermal cycling 5/37/55 °C - 1,200,000 cycles). Specimens were sectioned into sticks (1.0 mm2) and submitted to the microtensile test (Mechanical Test Machine - 0.5 mm/min). Fracture patterns and hybrid layer integrity were analyzed under Stereomicroscope and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). RESULTS: The BS results (3-way ANOVA, Bonferroni's test, α = 5%) showed that groups treated with CHX presented higher BS values than control groups; significant in all cases (p < .05), except for ENR submitted to TMC (p > .05). When CHX was applied and samples were cycled, UAS revealed higher BS (p < .05) than ENR. After TMC, cohesive fractures increased for UAS, regardless of CHX application. SEM analysis demonstrated different hybridization patterns for the adhesive systems tested. CONCLUSION: The performance of the universal adhesive system used in self-etch mode was better than that of the 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Universal adhesive systems have been developed in order to simplify the dentin hybridization protocol. It is important to determine the longevity of the adhesive interface using these bonding materials after chewing.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the dentine bond strength (BS) and the antibacterial activity (AA) of six adhesives against strict anaerobic and facultative bacteria. METHODS: Three adhesives containing antibacterial components (Gluma 2Bond (glutaraldehyde)/G2B, Clearfil SE Protect (MDPB)/CSP and Peak Universal Bond (PUB)/chlorhexidine) and the same adhesive versions without antibacterial agents (Gluma Comfort Bond/GCB, Clearfil SE Bond/CSB and Peak LC Bond/PLB) were tested. The AA of adhesives and control groups was evaluated by direct contact method against four strict anaerobic and four facultative bacteria. After incubation, according to the appropriate periods of time for each microorganism, the time to kill microorganisms was measured. For BS, the adhesives were applied according to manufacturers' recommendations and teeth restored with composite. Teeth (n=10) were sectioned to obtain bonded beams specimens, which were tested after artificial saliva storage for one week and one year. BS data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey test. RESULTS: Saliva storage for one year reduces the BS only for GCB. In general G2B and GCB required at least 24h for killing microorganisms. PUB and PLB killed only strict anaerobic microorganisms after 24h. For CSP the average time to eliminate the Streptococcus mutans and strict anaerobic oral pathogens was 30 min. CSB showed no AA against facultative bacteria, but had AA against some strict anaerobic microorganisms. CONCLUSIONS: Storage time had no effect on the BS for most of the adhesives. The time required to kill bacteria depended on the type of adhesive and never was less than 10 min. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Most of the adhesives showed stable bond strength after one year and the Clearfil SE Protect may be a good alternative in restorative procedures performed on dentine, considering its adequate bond strength and better antibacterial activity.