Microhardness evaluation around composite restorations using fluoride-containing adhesive systems

Authors

  • Cláudia Silami de Magalhães Federal University of Minas Gerais; Dental School; Department of Restorative Dentistry
  • Anderson Takeo Hara State University of Campinas; Piracicaba Dental School; Department of Restorative Dentistry
  • Cecilia Pedroso Turssi State University of Campinas; Piracicaba Dental School; Department of Restorative Dentistry
  • Mônica Campos Serra University of São Paulo; Ribeirão Preto Dental School; Department of Restorative Dentistry
  • Marcelo Giannini State University of Campinas; Piracicaba Dental School; Department of Restorative Dentistry

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572005000300011

Keywords:

Dental enamel, Fluoride, Adhesive systems, Microhardness

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microhardness of dental enamel around composite restorations bonded with fluoride-containing adhesive systems (FCAS), after thermo- and pH-cycling protocols. Standardized cylindrical cavities were prepared on enamel surfaces of 175 dental fragments, which were randomly assigned into seven experimental groups (n=25). Four groups used FCAS: Optibond Solo (OS); Prime&Bond 2.1 (PB); Syntac Sprint (SS) and Tenure Quick (TC). Other groups consisted of "Sandwich" technique restoration (STR) (glass ionomer liner + hydrophobic adhesive resin /restorative composite) or used Single Bond with (SB) or without (SBWC) cycling protocols. Adhesive systems were applied according to manufacturers' instructions and cavities were restored with a microfilled composite (Durafill VS). After finishing and polishing, all groups were submitted to 1,000 thermal cycles (5 ºC and 55 ºC) and to demineralization (pH 4.3) and remineralization (pH 7.0) cycling protocols, except for SBWC group. The Knoop microhardness of enamel surfaces were measured around restorations. Indentations were recorded at 150, 300 and 450-mm from the cavity wall. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Duncan's Test (a=0.05%). Means ± SD of enamel microhardness for the groups were (Kg/mm²): SBWC: 314.50 ± 55.93ª ; SB: 256.78 ± 62.66b; STR: 253.90 ± 83.6b; TQ: 243.93 ± 68.3b; OS: 227.97 ± 67.1c; PB: 213.30 ± 91.3d; SS: 208.73 ± 86.6d. Means ± SD of microhardness for the distances 150, 300, 450mm from the cavity wall were, respectively: 234.46 ± 77.81ª; 240.24 ± 85.12ª; 262.06 ± 79.46b. SBWC group, which was not submitted to thermo- and pH-cycling protocols, showed the highest enamel microhardness mean value and the FCAS resulted in lower microhardness values. At 450 mm from the cavity wall, the enamel microhardness increased significantly.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2005-09-01

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

Magalhães, C. S. de, Hara, A. T., Turssi, C. P., Serra, M. C., & Giannini, M. (2005). Microhardness evaluation around composite restorations using fluoride-containing adhesive systems . Journal of Applied Oral Science, 13(3), 259-264. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572005000300011