Cargando…
Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive
The purpose of this paper is to compare the fracture behavior of interfaces obtained using fourth-generation and universal dental adhesives. The study relies on optic and SEM to evaluate the dentin–adhesive–restoration material interface of the samples and also on FEA simulation of fracture behavior...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10488864/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37687525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16175834 |
_version_ | 1785103577812828160 |
---|---|
author | Călinoiu, Ștefan George Bîcleșanu, Cornelia Florescu, Anamaria Stoia, Dan Ioan Dumitru, Cătălin Miculescu, Marian |
author_facet | Călinoiu, Ștefan George Bîcleșanu, Cornelia Florescu, Anamaria Stoia, Dan Ioan Dumitru, Cătălin Miculescu, Marian |
author_sort | Călinoiu, Ștefan George |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose of this paper is to compare the fracture behavior of interfaces obtained using fourth-generation and universal dental adhesives. The study relies on optic and SEM to evaluate the dentin–adhesive–restoration material interface of the samples and also on FEA simulation of fracture behavior. Specimen fabrication relied on 20 extracted teeth, in which class I cavities were created according to a protocol established based on the rules of minimally invasive therapy. For the direct adhesive technique, the adhesives used were: three-step All Bond, three-batch A and one-step Clearfil Universal Bond Quick-batch B. The restoration was performed with the same composite for both adhesives: Gradia direct posterior. The simulation used a 3D reconstructed molar on which geometric operations were performed to obtain an assembly that replicated a physical specimen. Material properties were applied to each component based on the information found in the literature. A simplified model for crack propagation was constructed, and using the fracture mechanics tool in Ansys 2019, the stress intensity factors that act at the crack tip of the adhesive interface were obtained. Mechanical simulation and microscopic investigation showed us how the interface of the dentine–adhesive–filling material performed in cases of both dental adhesives and for a certain loading condition. Important differences were identified among the adhesives, the fourth generation being superior to the fourth generation especially due to the separate steps in which the tooth surface was prepared for adhesion. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10488864 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104888642023-09-09 Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive Călinoiu, Ștefan George Bîcleșanu, Cornelia Florescu, Anamaria Stoia, Dan Ioan Dumitru, Cătălin Miculescu, Marian Materials (Basel) Article The purpose of this paper is to compare the fracture behavior of interfaces obtained using fourth-generation and universal dental adhesives. The study relies on optic and SEM to evaluate the dentin–adhesive–restoration material interface of the samples and also on FEA simulation of fracture behavior. Specimen fabrication relied on 20 extracted teeth, in which class I cavities were created according to a protocol established based on the rules of minimally invasive therapy. For the direct adhesive technique, the adhesives used were: three-step All Bond, three-batch A and one-step Clearfil Universal Bond Quick-batch B. The restoration was performed with the same composite for both adhesives: Gradia direct posterior. The simulation used a 3D reconstructed molar on which geometric operations were performed to obtain an assembly that replicated a physical specimen. Material properties were applied to each component based on the information found in the literature. A simplified model for crack propagation was constructed, and using the fracture mechanics tool in Ansys 2019, the stress intensity factors that act at the crack tip of the adhesive interface were obtained. Mechanical simulation and microscopic investigation showed us how the interface of the dentine–adhesive–filling material performed in cases of both dental adhesives and for a certain loading condition. Important differences were identified among the adhesives, the fourth generation being superior to the fourth generation especially due to the separate steps in which the tooth surface was prepared for adhesion. MDPI 2023-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC10488864/ /pubmed/37687525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16175834 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Călinoiu, Ștefan George Bîcleșanu, Cornelia Florescu, Anamaria Stoia, Dan Ioan Dumitru, Cătălin Miculescu, Marian Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title | Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title_full | Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title_fullStr | Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title_short | Comparative Study on Interface Fracture of 4th Generation 3-Steps Adhesive and 7th Generation Universal Adhesive |
title_sort | comparative study on interface fracture of 4th generation 3-steps adhesive and 7th generation universal adhesive |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10488864/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37687525 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16175834 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT calinoiustefangeorge comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive AT biclesanucornelia comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive AT florescuanamaria comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive AT stoiadanioan comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive AT dumitrucatalin comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive AT miculescumarian comparativestudyoninterfacefractureof4thgeneration3stepsadhesiveand7thgenerationuniversaladhesive |