Scientific Documentation Adhese Universal Page 2 of...
Transcript of Scientific Documentation Adhese Universal Page 2 of...
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 2 of 42
Table of contents
1. Introduction 3
1.1 Mechanism of dental adhesion 3
1.2 Adhesive techniques 4
2. A brief History of Adhesives 5
3. Classification of Adhesives 6
3.1 Classification by generation 6
3.2 Classification by mechanism of adhesion / clinical steps 7
4. Universal Adhesives 8
5. Ivoclar Vivadent Adhesive Range 9
6. Adhese Universal 10
6.1 Indications 10
6.2 Mode of action 11
6.3 Advanced delivery via VivaPen 14
6.4 “Universality of Adhese Universal 16
7. Technical Data 17
8. In-Vitro Investigations 18
8.1 Adhesives and bond strength tests 18
8.2 Adhese Universal and direct restorations 19
8.3 Adhese Universal and core build up materials 29
8.4 Adhese Universal and indirect restorations 30
8.5 Adhese Universal – dentin penetration: bond and desensitisation 34
9. Clinical Investigations 36
10. Biocompatibility 38
10.1 Introduction 38
10.2 Cytotoxicity 38
10.3 Genotoxicity 38
10.4 Sensitisation and irritation 38 11. References 40
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 3 of 42
1. Introduction Adhesive dentistry has undergone remarkable and constant progress over recent decades - and has undoubtedly co-revolutionised restorative dental practice.1
Dental adhesives have developed hand in hand with dental composites. Composite materials first became available in dentistry in the 1960s, 2 and initially were mainly used in the anterior region, where amalgam fillings were deemed unaesthetic. In the 1990s they began to substitute amalgam as a universal filling material and composite restorations heralded a new minimally invasive era in dentistry. The retentive aspect of amalgam fillings was no longer necessary as the hole to be filled, had only to be as large as the demineralised tissue to be removed. This “new” development in restorative dentistry was only possible due to the simultaneous development of clinically reliable enamel/dentin adhesives. The nature of these adhesives and composites has continued to change over time.
1.1 Mechanism of dental adhesion
Two basic types of adhesion are possible:
Mechanical: via the penetration of adhesive resin into the tooth surface
Chemical: via chemical bonding to the inorganic component (hydroxyapatite) or organic components (collagen) of the tooth structure
Irrespective of adhesive type, a combination of the above is usually responsible for bonding with all modern adhesives.
1.1.1 Substrate Adhesive systems must establish a bond to both the restoration and the dental hard tissue. Composite restoratives consist of a hydrophobic matrix in which different filler particles are embedded. Teeth are comprised of two very different substrates: enamel and dentin. Enamel is essentially 96% hydroxyapatite, crystalline calcium phosphate, and 4% organic material and water 3 whereas dentin consists of 70% hydroxyapatite, 20% collagen and 10% water.4 Enamel is thus an essentially dry substrate, whilst dentin is moist, though both can be considered essentially hydrophilic in comparison to restorative materials. Adhesives therefore need to possess both hydrophobic and hydrophilic properties in order to establish a bond to both tooth and restorative substrates.
1.1.2 Smear layer The smear layer refers to a layer of dental “debris” about one micron thick lying over the prepared sections of tooth after instrumentation. It may have a protective function as it lowers dentin permeability; however as it partly penetrates the dentin tubuli it can pose a challenge to effective bonding.1 With early composite materials, it was observed that bonding agents that removed the smear layer, achieved better retention rates in clinical trials than those that merely modified it.5,6 Removal of the smear layer appeared to be a prerequisite for adhesion to dentin, and remains a largely accepted concept. Studies found that if the smear layer was left in place, only about 5 MPa of bond could be achieved prior to cohesive fracture within the smear layer.7,8
This led to the establishment of the group of bonding materials referred to as “total-etch” and later on “etch-and-rinse” adhesives.
Scientific
Etchingenamelenamel micro-reprisms action ibecomeis requdentina
Etchingsmear ltubular approxifundamfirst adhunable howeveextendindentin aincreme
Hybridisthe origadhesiomateria
1.2 A
1.2.1 TThe “tobefore (H3PO4)techniquphosphocarefullydiscuss
Fig.1: Sunetcheside shoof Leipz
c Documenta
g enamel: B.9 It increasprisms of
etention patfeature diffis then able interlockedired to obtl collagen in
g dentin: Elayer and ddentin res
mately 10 ental to achhesive matto penetra
er, penetrateng into the and is linkeent.
sed dentin ginal tooth on to tooth l is exchang
Adhesive t
The “Total-tal-etch” tebonding. T) which remue is also oric acid is y dried. Enion refers to
EM: Etced enamel wows etch patzig
ation Adhese
Buonocore ses the surfaenamel arettern forms ferent degrele to flow d with the etain an optn dentin bon
Etching dendemineralisesults in a c
µm,11 crehieving an eterials wereate and boe moist etchtubuli formd covalently
is a mixturestructure asubstrates
ged for synt
techniques
-Etch” or “rm refers to
Total-etch amoves the often referrinsed off t
namel is uso the neces
hed enamelwith smear lattern. Dr P G
e® Universal
(1955) wasace area, be cut eitherduring etch
ees of acidinto the m
enamel as rtimal retentnding.
ntin enlargees surface cup shaped
eating poroeffective boe hydrophoond to “wehed dentin a micro-me
y to the com
e of adhesiat a molec is based thetic resin.
s
“Etch-and-Ro the proce
adhesives insmear lay
rred to syntogether wisually etchessity of not o
: Left side shayer intact. R
Gabriel, Unive
s the first toby leaving ar transversehing becausd-solubility.1
icro-porositresin tags. Ative pattern
es the tubudentin (Figd expansio
ous zones ond.12 Initiabic. They w
et” dentin ssurfaces anechanical bmposite res
ive polymerular-level. on an exch.13
Rinse” Tecedure whernvolve an yer and cononymously th the smeaed for longover-drying
hows Right ersity
Fig. 2showphospUnive
o demonstran irregular wely or verticse the cent10 A resin-bties createdA stronger an on ename
ular opening. 2). Deminon of the d
with expoally etching worked suffsuccessfullynd form a hbond. The hstoration du
rs and dentThe funda
hange proc
chnique reby both einitial etchi
onditions thas the “et
ar layer andger than dethe dentin
2: SEM: Etcing open tuphoric acidersity of Leipz
ate the acidwhite etch pcally duringral and per
based fluid,d. Monomeacid or longel than is
gs, removeneralisationdentin tubu
osed collagdentin was ficiently on y. Modern ybrid layer
hybrid layeruring polyme
tal hard tissamental pricess by wh
enamel andng step wie preparattch-and-rinsd the exposentin. The after etchin
ched dentinubuli after c Total-Etchzig)
Pag
d etch technpattern (Figg preparatioripheral par, aided by ers polymerer exposureneeded to
es or disson of peri- anules to a dgen fibrils. problemati enamel, bhydrophilic
whereby rer seals the eerisation of
sues, differinciple ther
hich inorgan
d dentin areth phospho
tion. The tose” techniqsed dental “how wet g and rinsin
n: Dentinal conditioning h. Dr P
ge 4 of 42
nique on . 1). The
on and a rts of the capillary rise and e to acid
expose
olves the nd inter-depth of
This is ic as the but were c resins esin tags exposed f the first
ing from refore of nic tooth
e etched oric acid otal-etch
que. The tissue is is wet?” ng.
surface with the Gabriel,
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 5 of 42
Dentin should remain moist and slightly glossy in appearance, such that the collagen fibrils do not collapse (like cooked spaghetti) as this would make the surface less permeable to hydrophilic monomers in the adhesive and create a weak interface, potentially leading to a poor bond and postoperative sensitivity.
For this reason, plus the multi-step nature of the technique, total-etch adhesives are often referred to as technique-sensitive.14 They are however very well established and clinically successful.15, 16
1.2.2 Selective-Etch Technique This refers to the conventional etching technique whereby only the enamel edges of a preparation are etched with phosphoric acid and then rinsed. The dentin is then conditioned using an acidic primer step or an all-in-one self-etching adhesive. The smear layer is modified but not removed as surfaces are not rinsed after the primer application. This method can also be seen as an etch-and-rinse method for enamel only. This technique originally employed with total-etch adhesives (see Table 1), has enjoyed a resurgence in use with both self-etch adhesives and the new “universal” adhesives.
1.2.3 Self-Etch Technique Self-etch adhesives are intended for use without a separate etching step. Self-etch systems contain acidic monomers that prime/etch the enamel and dentin. In contrast to total-etch systems there is less danger of excessive demineralisation of the dentin as self-etch systems have a milder pH level. The potentially technique-sensitive step of drying the dentin to just the right degree after etching is also not required; thus the danger of collagen-fibre collapse can be excluded. Each of these factors should reduce the risk of postoperative complaints. As mentioned above, some dentists choose to acid-etch the enamel selectively prior to using self-etch adhesives.
The new universal adhesives are usually indicated for use with any one of the above etching techniques – depending on the clinical situation.
2. A brief History of Adhesives In order to understand the current situation with adhesive dentistry, it is important to look to the past and how and why the various generations of adhesives developed. The concept of bonding to enamel and dentin was first considered over 50 years ago by Buonocore.9
Extrapolating from industrial bonding techniques, he postulated that acids could be used as a surface treatment before the application of resins, and found that etching enamel with phosphoric acid increased the duration of adhesion under water. In 1963 he demonstrated further insight in discussing the differences of bonding to enamel vs. dentin.17 In the late 1960s, he suggested it was the formation of resin tags in the micro-porosities of etched enamel that were principally responsible for adhesion; with adhesion to dentin proving more elusive due to its composition, water content and the smear layer.
The first dental adhesives therefore only bonded resins to enamel, with little or no adhesion to dentin. Adhesives then evolved step by step with changes in chemistry, application, mechanism, technique and effectiveness – an evolution that accompanied the development of increasingly aesthetic dental materials, notably composite resins and ceramics.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 6 of 42
3. Classification of Adhesives Classifying adhesives into neat categories is nigh on impossible. Over the years, adhesives have been classified variably according to generation, method of etching, the number of bottles involved or the number of individual steps necessary for the entire bonding procedure. In addition to this, authors/dentists often define generations differently, they may or may not include etching in calculating the number of bottles or steps involved and some authors allocate specific adhesives to different groups e.g. the classification of a multi-step adhesive with a separate primer (traditionally viewed as an etch-and-rinse adhesive) as a self-etch adhesive. Comparative analysis is undoubtedly hindered by these not inconsiderable and inconsistent overlaps in attempts at classification and differences in interpretation. The following paragraphs and Table 1 attempt to clarify the situation.
3.1 Classification by generation
Dental adhesives can to a degree be categorised chronologically according to generation - a historical system of identification commonly used by adhesive manufacturers. The generation simply refers to when and in what order this type of adhesive was developed by the dental industry, ranging from 1st generation in the 1960s to modern 7th generation adhesives.
1st and 2nd generation bonding agents are no longer used, due mainly to failed attempts to bond with a loosely bound smear layer. They achieved poor bond strengths of 2-8 MPa 18 and failed to prevent marginal gaps.19 Manufacturers currently produce so-called 7th generation products, however 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th generation adhesives remain popular and offer various advantages depending on the clinical situation and the clinician’s personal preferences and experience. The new “universal” adhesives can be applied either using the total-etch, selective-etch or self-etch technique. Thus they fall rather into a new side class of adhesives rather than a totally new generation. The approximate timescale and principle differences between generations are shown in Table 1:
Generation Developed Mechanism / Steps Description
1 1960s
No
Lo
ng
er
in U
se Enamel etch only – poor adhesion
2 1970s Enamel etch only – improved adhesion
3 1980s/1990s
Etc
h &
Rin
se Selective-Etch/
Multi-Step
Selective enamel etch/etch-and-rinse with H3PO4. Dentin conditioned with primer to modify or remove smear layer
4 1990s Total-Etch/
Multi-/3-Step Total-etch/etch-and-rinse: separate primer and adhesive
5 Mid 1990s Total-Etch/
2-Step Total-etch/etch-and-rinse: combined primer and adhesive
6 Late 1990s
Sel
f-E
tch
Self-Etch/ 2-Step
Self-etch: etch and primer combined then hydrophobic bonding i.e. self-etch/multi-component
7 2000 + Self-Etch/
1-Step
Self-etch: etch, primer and adhesive combined i.e. self-etch/single component
Universal 2011 +
All-
Etc
h
Total/Self/Selective-Etch/ 1 or 2-Step
Total or selective etch procedure followed by universal adhesive or universal adhesive only in self-etch mode
Table 1: Classification overview of adhesives according to generation, mechanism of adhesion and number of clinical steps
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 7 of 42
3.1.1 Generations of Ivoclar Vivadent adhesives The multi-step system Syntac can be seen as belonging to both the 3rd and 4th generation of adhesives as it can be used with the selective-etch technique (3rd generation) or the total-etch technique (4th generation). ExciTE F is a typical one bottle (or VivaPen) adhesive involving a separate total-etch step and belongs to the 5th generation. AdheSE as a two-step self-etch system belongs to the 6th generation and AdheSE One F a single component self-etching adhesive to the 7th generation. Adhese Universal belongs to the new universal class of adhesives that allows for all the etching techniques described in section 1.2.
3.2 Classification by mechanism of adhesion / clinical steps
Whilst the generational system of classification is helpful for looking at adhesives from a historical perspective, with regard to adhesives currently on the market (generations 3-7), it may be more meaningful to classify them according to how they work and how many working steps are involved.
Modern dental adhesives can be classified into two basic types: etch-and-rinse and self- etch adhesives. Although the etch-and-rinse term is often used synonymously for total-etch adhesives, theoretically it covers both total-etch and selective-etch adhesives (i.e. total-etch: both enamel and dentin are etched and rinsed; selective-etch: just the enamel is etched and rinsed). These systems can then be sub-categorised based on the number of clinical steps involved: e.g. multi-step, three-step and two-step etch-and-rinse systems and two-step and one-step self-etch systems.
The etch-and-rinse system is distinct in that it has a separate etch-and-rinse step prior to the priming and bonding steps. The three-step etch-and-rinse/total-etch system (using fourth-generation adhesives) follows the conventional “etch-rinse-prime-bond” approach. The two-step etch-and-rinse system (using fifth-generation adhesives, also known as one-bottle adhesives) combines the primer and the bonding agent into one application. The self-etch adhesive system eliminates the rinsing phase after etching by using non-rinse acidic monomers to etch and prime dentin simultaneously. The two-step self-etch system (involving sixth-generation adhesives) uses acidic monomers as self-etch primers in the initial step and an adhesive resin in the second step. The one-step self-etch system (using seventh generation adhesives, also known as all-in-one adhesives) combines the (self-etch) acidic primer with the adhesive resin in one application step. This allows for simultaneous infiltration of adhesive resin to the depth of demineralisation, which may reduce postoperative sensitivity. The universal adhesives differ in terms of their claimed universality (see section 4), however in general they too combine the acidic primer with the adhesive resin in one step, can be used with all etching techniques and are suitable for use with both direct and indirect restorations.
To provide an overview of adhesives from both a historical and current perspective, Table 1 attempts to combine both methods of classification.
Perception and trends in adhesive use In 2010, conventional bonding comprised approximately 45% of the German bonding market in terms of sales with self-etching accounting for the rest.20 In terms of actual adhesive use, a GfK dental market survey of 300 dentists in 2010, reported that an estimated 62% of the adhesive procedures carried out were conventional/etch-and-rinse with the remaining 38% reported as self-etch procedures.21 GfK figures from the first half of 2013 indicate that conventional bonding has fallen to approximately 43% of the market with self-etching (which includes universal adhesives) accounting for the rest.22
It is generally accepted that the more time given to adhesive technique the better the clinical results, and that phosphoric acid etching remains the most effective way of pre-treating enamel due to the consistently better marginal quality achieved with this method.23
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 8 of 42
Due to differences in the ability of self-etch and total-etch adhesives in etching enamel and dentin, many dentists intuitively still prefer total-etch adhesives, notably if a major fraction of the bonding area is enamel e.g. aesthetically sensitive anterior restorations. Self-etch adhesives however have shown to provide superior and more predictable bond strengths to dentin and are, consequently, recommended for direct composite resin restorations, especially when predominantly supported by dentin.24 There has also been considerable recent discussion about the “resurrection” of selective-etching for self-etch adhesives. Frankenberger compared dentin and enamel bond values for self-etch adhesives used according to manufacturer instructions and again after an initial total-etch step. Whereas enamel values were shown to increase considerably the values on dentin tended to worsen. Selective-etching would therefore appear sensible when bonding to both enamel and dentin.23,25 According to Frankenberger, selective-etching always makes sense in combination with self-etch adhesives. 26
This apparent reluctance to forego phosphoric etching entirely has led to the next class of adhesives - universal adhesives which are not only less technique sensitive, but allow for the possibility of using the total or selective-etching technique.
4. Universal Adhesives Universal adhesives appeared on the market in 2011. This new (largely 1-step) adhesive category helps simplify the complexity surrounding the many types and categories of bonding procedures, offering products that can be used with all etch techniques, for direct and indirect bonding procedures and with light, dual and self-cure materials. The table below taken from The Dental Advisor 27 gives a current overview of the varying indications for five different “universal” adhesives
Product Company Total-Etch Technique
Self-Etch Technique
Dual-cure materials
without separate activator
Bonds to lithium
disilicate
without separate primer
Bonds to zirconia and
metal
without separate primer
ALL-BOND Universal
Bisco Dental Products
**
**
Peak Universal
Ultradent Products Inc.
Scotchbond Universal
3M ESPE
*
Optibond XTR
Kerr Corporation
Prime & Bond Elect
Dentsply Caulk
Table 2: A summary of indications for universal bonding agents on the market. Adapted from The Dental Advisor, March 2013 27
* Requires separate activator unless it is used with RelyX Ultimate Adhesive Resin Cement ** All-Bond Universal does bond to lithium disilicate and zirconia but the manufacturer recommends using a pure silane with
lithium disilicate and Z-Prime Plus with zirconia for optimum bond strengths.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 9 of 42
As table 2 indicates, it is important to note that the meaning of the term “universal” differs from manufacturer to manufacturer. Universal usually relates to one or more of the following issues:
compatibility with total, selective etch and self-etch techniques compatibility with direct and indirect bonding procedures ability to bond to different substrates ability to be used with dual-cure and self-cure materials (without the use of a separate
activator) use as a primer for silica-based and/or zirconia based and metallic restorations.
Universality is at times debateable. Although acceptable bond strengths were demonstrated to both enamel and dentin for the five universal adhesives noted in table 2 (in both total and self-etch modes) 27 - some products have drawbacks e.g. Scotchbond Universal/3M ESPE requires a separate activator when used for indirect restorations unless it is used with one particular cement - RelyX Ultimate Adhesive Resin Cement/3M ESPE. Prime & Bond Elect/Dentsply can be used with all etching techniques but is not alone compatible with dual cure materials. Optibond XTR/Kerr is not indicated for the total-etch technique.
Adhese Universal is indicated for use with the total-etch, self-etch techniques and with dual-cure materials without a separate activator. It is not however indicated as a separate primer for restorative substrates - as incorporating silane components into the adhesive has failed to render convincing in-vitro data. An external investigation by Lehmann and Kern at the University Clinic Schleswig-Holstein, Germany evaluated the adhesive bond achieved with “universal” adhesives to lithium disilicate ceramic - compared to a system using a dedicated primer. Four groups were compared: Monobond Plus & Multilink Automix vs. Scotchbond Universal & RelyX Ultimate/3M ESPE, Optibond XTR & NX 3/Kerr and All-Bond Universal & Duo-Link/Bisco. Although the initial bonding values were acceptable in all groups, the group using Monobond Plus indicated the highest values initially and these values also remained stable after 150 days’ water-storage and thermocycling. The All-Bond Universal group de-bonded after 30 days and the remaining groups exhibited very low bonding values of approximately 10 MPa. 28 As priming the indirect restoration represents a separate step anyway, the advantage of using the same product here is debateable. For optimal results with indirect restorations, the use of a dedicated ceramic / metal primer, such as Monobond Plus is strongly recommended.
5. Ivoclar Vivadent Adhesive Range Ivoclar Vivadent produces both total-etch and self-etch adhesives. The current range is depicted in table 3. There are valid pros and cons to both types of adhesive and of the multi-bottle/single bottle variants within these groups. Total-etch adhesives offer longer clinical experience, a more pronounced etch pattern in enamel and extensive removal of the smear layer. Self-etch adhesives on the other hand, may be less technique sensitive,29 reducing the danger of collagen collapse and can be applied in fewer steps. Adhese Universal aims to combine the advantages of both types of adhesive, offering dentists simplicity both in terms of application and the amount of practice-inventory required.
Total-Etch Adhesives Self-Etch Adhesives
Light-Cure Dual-Cure Light-Cure
Syntac Syntac AdheSE
ExciTE F ExciTE F DSC AdheSE One F
Universal Adhesives
Adhese Universal
Table 3: Ivoclar Vivadent adhesive range and associated category
Scientific
6. AAdheseprocedustandingcontainsstabilise
It is com
Fig. 3a-c
The chclinical Adhesesecondsimmobilfor both
6.1 I
Adheserestoratcementaprepare(e.g. imcervicalwhere s
c Documenta
Adhesee Universal ures. Adheg performas methacryers.
mpatible wit
c: Total-Etch
oice of toosituation i.
e Universal s. Thereaftele film-layer
h direct and
Indications
e Universal tions, for coation of ind
ed tooth surmmediate de
areas. As sufficient illu
ation Adhese
e® Univeis a single cse Univers
ance of Excylates, etha
h all etching
, Selective-E
oth conditioe. which wis then apper it is dispr results. Adindirect bon
s
is indicatedore build updirect restorfaces beforentin sealin
Adhese Unumination ca
e® Universal
ersal componentsal is baseciTE (F), thanol, wate
g technique
Etch and Self
oning technwill achieve plied to thepersed with dhese Univending proce
d for bondinps with lightrations withre the tempog/dual-bondniversal is aannot be en
t, light-cureded on the he AdheSEr, highly d
es: total etch
f-Etch techni
nique depensuperior c
cavity andoil/moistur
ersal is alwaedures.
ng or repairt, self and h light or dorary/permading techniqalways lighnsured e.g.
d adhesive know-how
E product fdispersed s
h, selective
ques with Ad
nds on theclinical longd rubbed intre-free comays light-cu
ring light cudual-curing
dual-curinganent cemeque) and fot-cured, it ithe cement
for direct aaccumulat
family and silicon diox
etch and se
dhese Unive
e dentist’s aevity and pto the surfapressed airred (10 sec
red compos compositeluting comp
entation of ior desensitizs contraindtation of roo
Page
and indirect ted from tMultilink P
xide, initiat
elf-etch.
rsal (left to ri
assessmenpatient satiaces for at r until a thiconds) prior
site and coes, for the aposites, forindirect restzing hypers
dicated in sot canal pos
e 10 of 42
bonding the long
Primer. It ors and
ight)
nt of the sfaction. least 20 n glossy r to use -
mpomer adhesive r sealing torations sensitive ituations sts.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 11 of 42
6.2 Mode of action
6.2.1 Bonding The breakthrough in dentin bonding came with the multi/three-step systems, which bridged the gap between the hydrophilic dentin and the hydrophobic resin-based filling material, via the sequential application of the components. In essence, the multi-component systems meant that each bonding issue could be dealt with in turn enabling the practitioner to achieve a transition between the hydrophilic dentin and hydrophobic composite. Syntac is a classic example of this 3rd/4th generation of adhesives. After etching and rinsing, the hydrophilic Syntac Primer is applied to the entire cavity (enamel and dentin) followed by the hydrophilic Syntac Adhesive and then a layer of the hydrophobic Heliobond. The table below illustrates the chronological advancement of Ivoclar Vivadent adhesives and the reduction in steps involved to achieve a bond between the restorative material and the tooth structure:
Working Step
Purpose of step Syntac (1990)
ExciTE (F) (1999)
AdheSE(2002)
AdheSE One (F) (2007)
Adhese Universal
(2014)
Enamel conditioning
Expose retentive etching pattern
Total Etch H3PO4
Total Etch H3PO4
AdheSEPrimer
AdheSE One F
Adhese Universal
Dentin conditioning
Modify smear layer and expose collagen and tubules, infiltration and hydrophilic wetting
Syntac Primer
Wetting
Infiltrate collagen with hydrophilic resin. Create transition between hydrophilic substrate and planned restoration via tag formation
Syntac Adhesive
ExciTE (F)
Bonding
Hydrophobic bonding agent to bond to restoration via co-polymerisation with restorative material
Heliobond AdheSE Bonding
Table 4: Bonding steps and how Ivoclar Vivadent adhesives work
Clearly adhesive development has aimed at providing dentists with products that are faster and easier to apply. Adhese Universal essentially belongs to a new class of adhesive rather than a new generation. In essence, it is also a one-bottle self-etch adhesive (1-step) which can also be used according to the total-etch or selective etching techniques (2-step) and for indirect bonding procedures.
Adhese Universal and universal adhesives in general, contain low levels of acidic monomer, and are therefore “mild-etching” adhesives. Adhese Universal has a pH of approximately 2.5 – 3.0. The Adhese Universal matrix is based on a combination of monomers of hydrophilic (hydroxyethyl methacrylate/HEMA), hydrophobic (decandiol dimethacrylate/D3MA) and intermediate (bis-GMA) nature. This combination of properties allows Adhese Universal to reliably bridge the gap between the hydrophilic tooth substrate and the hydrophobic resin restorative, under a variety of surface conditions. Table 5 details the monomer matrix of Adhese Universal.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 12 of 42
Monomer Name Type Purpose
MDP Methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate
Phosphoric methacrylate
Forms strong bond to apatite surfaces. Promotes adhesion to tooth surface by formation of non-soluble Ca2+ salts
MCAP Methacrylated carboxylic acid polymer
Carboxylic acid functional polymer reacts with and bonds to apatite. The presence of many carboxylic acid groups along a polymeric backbone/chain allows multiple bonds to the tooth surface.
HEMA Hydroxyethyl methacrylate
Hydrophilic mono-functional methacrylate
Promotes wetting of polar / inorganic and moist surfaces. Assists penetration of liquid filled dentinal tubuli.
Bis-GMA Bisphenol A glycidyl methacrylate
Hydrophilic / hydrophobic crosslinking dimethacrylate
Facilitates compatibility of hydrophilic HEMA and hydrophobic D3MA in the presence of water, thereby preventing phase separation of adhesive. Imparts high mechanical strength and resilience to adhesive layer.
D3MA Decandiol dimethacrylate
Hydrophobic crosslinking dimethacrylate
Enables the reaction of the adhesive with the less polar monomers of the filling or luting composite.
Table 5: Type and purpose of monomers contained in Adhese Universal
Table 6 describes the bonding mechanism of Adhese Universal in more detail i.e. how the different bonding steps/conditions are achieved by the balanced composition of specific components within the formulation. Adhese Universal is considered here when used alone i.e. according to the self-etch technique.
For clarity the traditional working/bonding “steps” as previously set out in table 4 are used, however, it should be made clear that with a one-step/one-liquid system, the steps are achieved simultaneously not consecutively.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 13 of 42
Working Step Purpose of step Adhese Universal
Enamel conditioning
Formation of a stable bond via strongly bound monomer layer on enamel surface
Hydrophilic phosphate group of MDP facilitates mild acid demineralisation and formation of stable calcium salts and chemical bond to hydroxyapatite
Agitation of adhesive for 20s maximizes contact of acid monomers (MDP and MCAP) with enamel surface
Reliable wetting of apatite due to synergistic effect of MDP and MCAP promoting higher bond strengths to enamel
Precipitation of MDP as calcium salt provides stable bond to apatite and promotes marginal integrity
Dentin conditioning
Hybridisation and stabilisation of smear layer
Formation of a stable bond via strongly bound monomer layer on dentinal surface
Hydrophilic phosphate group of MDP facilitates mild acid demineralisation and formation of chemical bond with calcium and hydroxyapatite
Agitation of adhesive for 20s maximizes contact of acid monomers (MDP and MCAP) with dentin surface
Infiltration of dry and moist dentin facilitated by hydrophilicity of HEMA – and due to mild etching nature, dentin is not over-demineralised
Wetting Infiltrate collagen with hydrophilic resin.
Infiltration of hydrophilic surfaces facilitated by hydrophilic monomers
Bonding
Create compatibility and transition between hydrophilic tooth substrate and hydrophobic composite
Transition between hydrophilic tooth substrate and hydrophobic restorative aided by the hydrophilic/intermediate/hydrophobic monomer combination of HEMA, BisGMA and D3MA respectively
Table 6: How Adhese Universal components achieve a bond as a one-step universal adhesive
6.2.2 Desensitisation Dentin hypersensitivity is a common condition, notably after dental restorative work. It is generally agreed that hypersensitivity occurs due to fluid movements within the dentin tubuli in response to stimuli such as cold, warmth or osmotically active substances such as sugar.30
The water/ethanol solvents and the integrated micro-fillers used in Adhese Universal are designed to enhance penetration into the dentin tubuli to ensure the formation of a reliable dentin seal by a homogenous adhesive layer with defined resin tags. In addition, the acidic monomers contained in Adhese Universal trigger a coagulation of the proteins in the dentinal fluid - so contributing to the mechanical sealing of the tubuli by helping to prevent fluid movement and thus postoperative sensitivity associated with that movement. A combination of thixotropic silica and carboxylic acid functionalised polymer also facilitates the uniform film-formation of Adhese Universal. During the recommended 20 second scrubbing application, the adhesive flows over, penetrates and covers the dentine uniformly. Diffusion through the smear layer aids mechanical sealing and thus desensitisation. (See section 8.5 Adhese Universal – dentin penetration: bond and desensitisation).
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 14 of 42
6.2.3 Adhesive cementation of indirect restorations Adhesive layer thickness is an issue when seating indirect restorations. Adhese Universal is always “thinned out” with compressed air to form a thin coating – aided by the thixotropic silica filler. The adhesive layer is light-cured before seating indirect restorations – eliminating the need for an additional dual-cure activator (DCA). Curing Adhese Universal immobilises the acid monomers and allows good polymerisation at the adhesive-cement interface without a DCA (see section 8.4 for tests with indirect restorations).
The mild etching formulation also renders Adhese Universal compatible with the initiator systems of light and dual-curing luting composites and light, dual and self-curing core build up composites.
6.3 Advanced delivery via VivaPen
Adhese Universal is available in the unique VivaPen® for precision dispensing as well as quick and easy intraoral application for optimum efficiency with minimum waste. The VivaPen features an easy-to-use click mechanism and enables targeted, single-handed deployment of the adhesive exactly where it is needed. A few clicks are sufficient to saturate the brush tip of the snap-on cannula. The amount of adhesive left in the VivaPen can be checked via the fill-level-window at the end. Adhese Universal is also available in a bottle delivery form.
Fig. 4: Adhese Universal VivaPen with snap-on brush cannulas
The VivaPen is designed to keep solvent loss by evaporation to an absolute minimum. This is in contrast to adhesives dispensed from bottles where a higher degree of solvent loss is simply unavoidable. As such, the VivaPen delivery form helps to keep the liquid sealed ensuring maximal applications per ml and consistent adhesive viscosity. In a study by Berndt & Partner regarding the efficiency of the VivaPen and other adhesive delivery forms, it was found that the VivaPen delivered up to 190 single tooth applications per pen.
Scientific
Benchm
The pacthe amobottle dclinical
MethodUniversDentspl
The proplastic c120-4Mapplicatthree cScotchbiBond Sand 1 dfor Optiinstructicavity mmixing p
Results
Fig. 5: TPartner 2
With ovat 96 pCorrespconvent
c Documenta
marking: V
ckaging engount of waelivery systuse.
ds: Adhesesal/3M ESPy and iBond
oducts werecavity mode) with a stors, the miclicks of thbond UniverSelf Etch/Hedrop of the ibond XTRions for use
model and “plates etc.
s:
The number o2013
ver 190 appper ml – almpondingly ittional bottle
ation Adhese
VivaPen Un
gineers Berste and efftems using
e UniversaPE, Optibond Self Etch/
e used 5 tel was usedsensitivity xing wells a
he VivaPenrsal/3M ESPeraeus Kulzadhesive w) were usee. “Adhesiv“adhesive w
of application
lications pemost three t also exhibe delivery sy
e® Universal
iversal Eva
rndt + Partnficiency gecomparativ
l supplied nd XTR/Ke/Heraeus K
imes a dayd for each aof 0.0001gand cavity mn were usePE, All-Boner. For the
was used foed for all bve used” rewasted” refe
ns per VivaPe
er 2 ml-Vivatimes more
bited the loystems (Fig
aluation, B
ner, conducnerated by
ve, gravimet
in the Viverr, All-Bonulzer – all s
y to simulaadhesive apg, were usmodels befed for one
nd UniversaOptibond X
or each appottle-adhes
efers to the ers to that
en/bottle and
aPen, it exhe than the west amou. 6).
erndt + Pa
ted an indethe VivaP
tric/weight a
vaPen wasnd Universasupplied in b
te daily clinpplication ased to wefore and afte applicatioal/Bisco, PrimXTR/Kerr 2-plication. Misives as ind
weighed mmaterial we
d ml for vario
ibited the hother conv
unt of waste
rtner, Augu
ependent even comparanalysis dur
comparedal/Bisco, Prbottles.
nical use. And precisionigh the boer use. Foron. One dme & Bond bottle systexing wells (dicated by material actueighed foun
ous universa
ighest numentional boe (53%) wh
Page
ust 2013
valuation to red to convring simulat
d with Scorime & Bon
A standardn scales (Kottles/VivaPr Adhese Urop was uElect/Dent
em, 1 drop o(two separathe manufaually appliend on appli
l adhesives.
mber of applottle deliverhen compa
e 15 of 42
analyse ventional ted daily
otchbond d Elect/
Class I Kern ABJ Pen, the niversal,
used for sply and of primer ate wells acturers’ ed to the cator(s),
Berndt &
ications, ry forms. red with
Scientific
Fig. 6: P2013
Precisiolargely da mixing
The Vivunknow CustomIn an ocustomeAdheSEfound toregardinappraisa
6.4 “
The speenables Suitabidispersifitting inbuild up
Compaand hy(hydropoptimisetooth suhighly to
c Documenta
Percentage o
on click didue to the fg well – elim
vaPen’s prwn wastage
mer Satisfaonline custoers in GermE One F) coo be “muchng applicatal of ergono
“Universal
ecially tunes its use for
lity for boing with disndirect restop and luting
atibility withydrophilic pphilic) and ed mild-etchurfaces, andolerant of d
ation Adhese
of adhesive
spensing: fact that theminating the
ecise click i.e. evapora
ction Survomer satisfamany (n=81ompared to h better” ortion time, bomics.
ity” of Adh
d compositboth direct
oth directpersed air aorations. Licomposites
h all etchinproperties i
the restorhing characd due to its entin moistu
e® Universal
used and w
The compae product cae discarded
mechanismation, crusti
ey action surve) were askother delive
r “better” byby 82% in
hese Unive
ion of Adheand indirec
and indiand curing ght-cured as and has p
ng techniqn order torative matecteristics whoptimal balure renderin
wasted for va
aratively lowan be appliematerial co
m and safeing on the li
ey carried ked to rate ery forms sy 85% of cterms of
rsal
ese Universct restoratio
irect restothe adhesiv
adhesive coproven to be
ques: Adheo establisherial (hydrohich effectivlance of hydng it suitabl
arious univer
w wastage aed intra-oraommonly lef
ety-cap alsid, involunta
out by Ivocthe VivaPeuch as bottcustomers application
sal, as descons and all e
orations: Tve, avoids po-polymerise operator-t
sives need a bond bophobic). Avely conditiodrophilic ane for use w
rsal adhesive
associated lly directly wft over in the
so facilitateary expulsio
clar Vivadeen (availableles or singlein terms of
method a
cribed in theetch techniq
The low filpossible neges well witholerant.
to combinebetween thAdhese Unon both un-d hydrophoith all etchin
Page
es. Berndt &
with the Vivwithout the e dish.
e the low lon of adhes
nt in Augue for ExciTe dose unitf handling, and by 83%
e previous ques:
lm thicknegative effech composit
e both hydrhe tooth sniversal po-etched andobic monomng protocols
e 16 of 42
& Partner
vaPen is need for
evels of ive etc.
st 2012, E F and s. It was by 76%
% in an
sections
ss after cts when tes, core
rophobic substrate ossesses d etched
mers, it is s.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 17 of 42
7. Technical Data Adhese Universal
Standard - Composition (in weight %)
Methacrylates 67.0
Water, Ethanol 25.0
Highly dispersed silicon dioxide 4.0
Initiators and Stabilisers 4.0
Physical properties: Shear bond strength
In combination with:
- direct restorative composites
- light-curing composite cements
- light-curing core build-up composites
Test method Specification Example value**
Dentin Enamel
MPa MPa
ISO 29022 ISO 29022
≥ 25* ≥ 17*
33.1 ± 3.921.5 ± 3.3
* 4 from 5 test pieces ** SE Modus in combination with Tetric EvoCeram (light-curing)
In combination with:
- self-curing core build-up composites
Test method Specification Example value***
Dentin Enamel
MPa MPa
ISO 29022 ISO 29022
≥ 25* ≥ 14*
28.0 ± 5.629.8 ± 3.7
* 4 from 5 test pieces *** TE Modus in combination with MultiCore Flow (self-curing)
Scientific
8. INumeroproduct– notabadhesivcharactethe cou
8.1 A
In genewith thetensile s
The stamethod materia
Shear schema
Fig. 7a-bRestorat
The difpropertivalues compar
c Documenta
In-Vitroous in vitro t. Though nbly in predves, the adheristically cnterpart i.e.
Adhesives
ral, for sheae adhesive tstrength tes
andard ISO used to dls and tooth
bond strenatically in the
b: Schematictions.
fferent meties and areobtained d
red with sam
Direct
ation Adhese
o Investiinvestigatio
ot capable dicting tolerhesive strenarried out o. direct/indir
and bond
ar bond streto be testedst the load is
O 29022, redetermine th structure.
ngth testinge diagrams
c representa
hods of boe best used depend on mples prepa
t Restoratio
e® Universal
igationsons are carof predictinrance to hngth and mon extractedrect restorat
strength te
ength tests,d and is shes applied at
eleased in 2he adhesiv
g protocols below.
ation of shea
ond strengtin combinathe exact
ared by the
ons
s
rried out dung clinical shandling infmarginal quad human ortion they ar
ests
, a composieared off pat a right ang
2013 - on ve bond str
s for direc
ar bond stren
th testing ation to max
test methosame lab u
Ind
uring the deuccess direfluences. Inality are of r bovine teere intending
te test specarallel to thgle to the bo
dentistry arength betw
ct and ind
ngth testing f
illuminate dximise signod employe
using the sa
direct Resto
evelopmentectly, they an the deveprimary imp
eth and usuto bond to
cimen is boe bonding sonding surfa
adhesion, dween direct
irect restor
for direct (lef
different asificance of ed and came method
orations
Page
t phase of are useful inelopment oportance. Tally take plthe tooth st
nded to a ssurface. In ace.
details a sht dental res
rations are
ft) and indire
spects of adata. The an only be
d.
e 18 of 42
a dental ndicators of dental Tests are ace with tructure.
substrate a micro-
hear test storative
e shown
ect (right)
adhesive absolute usefully
Scientific
8.2 A
8.2.1 B
Bond sPowers
Methodan invesodium with 600The bonthe subor TetriUltradencylinderThe spetesting w1mm/m Resultsone teswith the
Fig. 8: 6mode on
Concluvalues bonding
c Documenta
Adhese Un
Bond stren
strength of s. July 201
d: This sheastigation byazide solut
0 grit SiC pnding agentstrate and c EvoCerant shear tesr was then lecimens wewas performin.
s: The folloster using Ae two compo
6.5 minute exn dentin with
sion: Combut not st
g direct rest
ation Adhese
niversal and
ngths to de
two bondi3
ar bond stry The Denttion and the
paper to forts – Adhesecured accom composist mould anight-cured a
ere tested immed on a un
owing table Adhese Univosites Tetric
xpress bond Tetric EvoC
parable “imtatistically storatives.
e® Universal
d direct res
entin and e
ng agents.
rength test, al Advisor. en in salinem bonding e Universal
ording to thete was thend jig to proaccording tommediatelyniversal tes
shows theversal and c EvoCeram
strengths oferam and TP
mmediate” bosignificant)
storations
namel
. The Denta
with directHuman ex
e, were emsubstrates or Scotchb
e manufactuen placed ooduce a 2.3o the manu
y (6.5 minutsting machin
e 6.5 minuteScotchbon
m and TPH
f Adhese UnPH Spectra.
ond strengtand Scotc
al Advisor
tly placed cxtracted thirbedded in aof ground
bond Univeurer’s instru
on top of th38 mm diamfacturer’s ines) after fane (Instron 5
e express bd Universa Spectra/De
iversal and SThe Dental A
ths to dentinchbond Un
Investigati
composites,rd molars, pacrylic resinenamel andrsal/3M ESuctions. TPHhe bonding meter cylindnstructions brication. S5866) at a c
bond strengl/3M ESPEentsply.
Scotchbond Advisor, July
n for Adhesniversal we
Page
ion. R. Yap
was carriepreviously sn discs andd superficia
SPE were apH Spectra/Dagent, utili
der. The cowhilst in the
Shear bond crosshead s
gths to denE in self-etc
Universal in y 2013
se Universaere exhibite
e 19 of 42
pp, J. M.
ed out in stored in d ground al dentin. pplied to Dentsply sing the
omposite e mould. strength speed of
ntin from h mode,
self-etch
al (higher ed when
Scientific
Immeditechniq
In ordeAdheseBulk Filon both(Liechteand bovSchaan
Fig 9: SBulk Fill
ConcluUniversindepen Immeditechniq
The samVivadenexistencOperatoUniversstrengthUniversOperato
c Documenta
iate and 24que. R&D S
er to test ue Universal l were meah enamel enstein) andvine teeth
n vs. Amhers
Shear bond son dentin an
sion: Comsal with Tetndent of sub
iate and 24que with dif
me shear bnt Amherst ce or non-eor 1 came frsity of Buffahs on enamsal for operaor 4 on enam
ation Adhese
4 hour bonSchaan, Lie
user-sensitivand Scotch
asured immeand dentind the Test in Schaan.st.
strengths of nd enamel in
mparable botric EvoCerbstrate and
4 hour bonfferent ope
bond streng(USA) Tes
existence ofrom R&D Salo. Both prmel after 24ators 1, 2 anmel due to t
e® Universal
nd strengthechtenstein
vity; shear hbond Univeediately (aft
n at both tCenter in A. The grap
Adhese Un different tes
ond strengram Bulk Fwith compa
nd strengtherators. Am
th tests witst Center byf user-senschaan, Ope
roducts elic4 hours wend 3. Scotctime constra
hs Adhese n and Amh
bond strenersal/3M ESter 60 secothe Ivoclar
Amherst (USh below sh
iversal and st centres. R
gth values Fill – both 6arable resul
hs Adhese mherst Test
th the samey four differsitivity. Humerator 2 andcited compare consider
chbond Univraints.
Universal erst Test C
ngth tests wSPE plus thonds) on hur Vivadent SA). Humahows a sim
Scotchbond &D Schaan/A
for Adhese60 secondslts between
Universal t Center, M
e products wrent operato
man dentin/ed 3 from Amarable bondrably and cversal was u
and ScotcCenter USA
with the unhe compositman dentinR&D depan teeth wer
milar pattern
Universal wAmherst, Ma
e Universas and 24 h
test centre
and ScotcMay 2013
were carrieors in orderenamel was
mherst and O strengths,
consistently unfortunate
Page
chbond – SA, May 2013
niversal adte Tetric Ev
n and after 2artment in re used in n left and
with Tetric Eay 2013
al and Scohours after es.
chbond – S
ed out at ther to further s used for aOperator 4 however thigher for
ely not meas
e 20 of 42
Self etch 3
hesives: voCeram 24 hours Schaan
Amherst right i.e.
voCeram
otchbond bonding
Self etch
e Ivoclar test the
all tests. from the he bond Adhese
sured by
Scientific
Fig. 10: Adhese
Concluand 3.
Adhese
Nine intUniversEach dethe 2 low
Fig.11: differen Conclusupport
c Documenta
Shear bond Universal an
sion: Simil
e Universal
ternal dentsal and Scoentist produwest values
Bond strent dentists o
sion: Comting the con
ation Adhese
strengths mnd Scotchbon
ar bond str
l/Scotchbo
tists in Schotchbond Uuced 7 sams for each a
gths with An bovine de
parable bonsiderable te
e® Universal
easured by fnd Universal
rength value
ond – bond
aan also cUniversal/3Mmples per adadhesive we
Adhese Univentin. R&D S
nd strengthechnique/us
four different. Amherst Te
es were me
strength t
carried out M ESPE ondhesive. Boere discarde
versal and SSchaan, Ja
s were achser-toleranc
t operators oest Center, J
easured bet
tests, R&D
a product n bovine deond strengthed from the
Scotchbondanuary 2014
ieved with bce of the pro
on human deJuly 2013
tween opera
Schaan, Ja
comparisonentin, showh values weevaluation
Universal -4
both materioducts.
Page
entin and ena
ators – nota
anuary 201
n test with wing similarere determi(n=5).
- measured
als by all d
e 21 of 42
amel with
ably 1, 2
14
Adhese r results. ned and
d by nine
entists –
Scientific
“ImmedMeerbe
Van MeUniversBond/Kinstructiprepareto prodcomposaccordinwater aplanned
Fig. 12: self-etch
Conclueither e
Bond stechniqNovem
The sheUniversXTR/Ketotal etc Methodin salineform bowas onaccordinaccordindentin acured awas theto prodaccordinafter bea univer
c Documenta
diate” miceek, Depart
eerbeek carsal, Scotchburaray. Tesions for us
ed using theuce a clini
site. Ten teng to the to
at 37°C befod after 3 and
Micro-tensileh techniques.
sion: Thertch techniq
strength oques. The ber 2013 (*
ear bond strsal/3M ESPerr and Peach technique
d: Human ee, were em
onding subsly tested onng to etchng to the and enameaccording toen placed oduce a 2.38ng to the m
eing stored rsal testing
ation Adhese
cro-tensile tment of Or
rried out mibond Univesting was cse. The rese Micro-Specally relevaeth per adhotal-etch orore micro-ted 6 months
e bond stren. B. Van Mee
re was no sue.
of several Dental Ad
* 2 separate rep
rengths of sPE, ALL-BOk Universales.
extracted thmbedded in strates of gn enamel. Thant instrucmanufactur
el whereby o the manun top of the8 mm diam
manufacturein 37°C watmachine (In
e® Universal
bond streral Health S
cro-tensile rsal/3M EScarried out sults below ecimen Forant smear hesive werer self-etch tensile bond.
ngths to bur-erbeek, KU L
statistically
bonding avisor Inves
ports)
six different OND Univer
Bond/Ultra
ird molars, acrylic res
ground enamThe enamections. Therer’s instructhe bondin
ufacturer’se bonding ameter cylindr’s instructioter for 24 honstron 5866
ength of Sciences, K
bond strengSPE and the
in self-etcshow the
rmer equipplayer. Tetrie tested. Thtechnique. d strength t
-cut dentin oLeuven, 2013
significant
agents usestigations.
universal arsal/Bisco, adent were t
previously sin discs anmel and suel was etche bonding ctions. Theng agent winstructions
agent utilisinder. The cons whilst iours. Shea6) at a cross
Adhese UKU Leuven
gth tests one two-step h and tota“bur-cut” v
ped with a mic EvoCerahese wereSpecimensesting was
of various ad3. * (Clearfil SE
difference
ed with th. R. Yapp,
adhesives: APrime & Btested acco
stored in sond ground tuperficial deed with 37%agents we
self-etch was applied s. The comng the Ultracomposite cn the mouldr bond strenshead spee
Universal tn, Belgium,
n the three self etch adl-etch mode
values on fmedium gritm Bulk Filcut in half were storecarried out
dhesives usiBond not indicat
between th
e self-etchJ M. Pow
Adhese Uniond Elect/D
ording to bo
odium azidethrough 600entin. The t% phosphoere then atechnique wdirectly to
mposite TPHadent shear cylinder wad. The specngth testing
ed of 1mm/m
Page
to Dentin. , 2013
adhesives:dhesive Clee accordingflat dentin st (107µm) dl was used- each half
ed for one t. Further te
ng the total-ted for total-etch
he adhesive
h* and totwers, A. Ba
iversal, ScoDentsply, O
oth the self-e
e solution a0 grit SiC ptotal-etch teoric acid anapplied anwas used the substrH Spectra/Dr test mouldas then ligcimens werg was perfomin.
e 22 of 42
B Van
Adhese earfil SE g to the surfaces diamond d as the f treated week in esting is
-etch and
technique)
es using
tal-etch* aumann.
otchbond Optibond etch and
and then paper to echnique d rinsed d cured on both rate and Dentsply d and jig, ht-cured
re tested rmed on
Scientific
Resultssame mthe self-
Adhese
Scotchb
All-Bond
Prime &
Optibon
Peak Un
Table 7etch and
(* 2 reports
Fig. 13: etch tech
(* 2 reports
Adheseconditioand subAdhesevalues o ConcluUniversetch tec
c Documenta
s: The resumethods, as-etch and to
Universal
bond Univer
d Universal
& Bond Elect
nd XTR**
niversal Bon
7: Shear bond total-etch te
s: 1 SE & 1 TE)
Shear bond hniques. The
s: 1 SE & 1 TE)
e Universal ons. The othbstrate the
e Universal on dentin i.e
sion: High sal. Highestchniques.
ation Adhese
ults here cos detailed abotal-etch mo
Den
35.4
rsal 41.1
36.6
t 42.4
43.5
nd 35.2
nd strengths echniques. T
(** not indicate
strengths ofe Dental Adv
(Optibond XTR
exhibited bher productgreatest va(31.4) and e. the differ
bond strent values wit
e® Universal
mbine the bove. The sodes are sh
tin
4 (5.0)
(7.4)
6 (5.7)
4 (5.9)
5 (11.2)
2 (7.0)
of various uThe Dental Ad
ed for total etch
f various “unvisor July 201
R not indicated f
bond strengts showed gariance waPrime & Boences betw
ngths on allth Adhese U
results of Dshear bondhown in both
Shear Bo
SELF-ETC
Enam
31.4
30.0
19.8
19.2
30.8
28.8
universal adhdvisor July 2
technique)
iversal” adhe13 and Nove
for total etch tec
gths over 3greater varias found onond Elect (
ween produc
l substratesUniversal o
Dental Advis strength vah the table a
ond Strengt
H
mel
(2.8)
(6.7)
(2.9)
(5.0)
(4.6)
(8.3)
hesives on d2013 and No
esives when ember 2013*
chnique)
30 MPa onation in bon
n enamel in19.2). All pcts were no
s under all on enamel u
sor Reportsalues on deand graph b
th: MPa (SD
Ena
37.
33.
31.
33.4
35.
25.
dentin and envember 2013
used with th
n all substrnd strengthn the self-eroducts exht statistically
etching conusing both
Page
s, using exaentin and enbelow.
D)
TOTAL-ET
amel
0 (1.9)
0 (6.9)
6 (6.0)
4 (7.9)
9 (5.1)
3 (6.9)
namel using3*
he self-etch a
rates and us. Within te
etch mode hibited comy significan
nditions for self-etch a
e 23 of 42
actly the namel in
TCH
the self-
and total-
under all echnique between
mparative t.
Adhese nd total-
Scientific
AdhesiAlabam
Burgessmeasurprocedu
Methodexpose ground surfaceof the composwere thusing a Peak U
Resultsgroup aThe Dethe comAdvisor
Fig. 14: the self-e
(Optibond
Concludifferenetch onstandarperform
c Documenta
ve shear bma, Birming
s carried oring the 24ure and self
d: The testsa flat bon
with a seri. 60 teeth wetch gel (t
site Z100/3Men stored inuniversal teniversal Bo
s: The aveare shown inntal Adviso
mposite cylir test series
Shear bond etch and tota
XTR not indicat
sion: Thert technique
n enamel grd deviation
mance on thi
ation Adhese
bond to toogham USA.
out similar 4 hour bonf-etch proce
s were carrnding surfaes of abras
were testedtotal-etch teM ESPE wn an incubaesting machnd was test
rage shearn the graphr for all pronder used, .
strengths ofal–etch techn
ted for total etch
re were no groups: Se
group shown in self-etcis aesthetic
e® Universal
oth structu. Novembe
testing as d strengths
edure.
ried out on ce. These
sive discs fi per techniqechnique) a
was bondedator at 37°Chine (Instroted later in e
r bond streh below. Thducts. It shwhich was
f various “unniques. J. Bu
h technique)
statisticallyelf-etch on dwed greaterch mode oally relevan
ure – 24 hor 2013
at The Des on both
240 freshlyflattened e
inishing off que i.e. 12 and adhesi
d to each toC for 24 hou
n 5565 MA exactly the
ength valuee values inould be not
s 1.5 mm h
niversal” adheurgess. Unive
y significantdentin and tr variation.on enamel,nt substrate
our bond.
ental Advisenamel an
y extracted enamel andwith grit 32per adhesivive, a 1.5ooth surfacrs. Shear bUSA) at a same way
s for each this test seted that valere compar
esives on deersity of Alab
differencestotal-etch on
Adhese U which can.
J. O. Burg
or with thend dentin a
human teed deep de20 to estabve/techniqumm diamee and light
bond strengtcrosshead but with ha
adhesive eries were lues are affered to 2.38
entin and enabama. Novem
s between n dentin and
Universal exn be an in
Page
gess. Unive
e same proafter the to
eth ground ntin sample
blish a standue. After apeter cylindet-cured. Spths were caspeed of 1mlf the samp
in each teclower than ected by the mm in The
amel when umber 2013
products wd enamel. Txhibited the
ndicator for
e 24 of 42
ersity of
oducts - otal-etch
down to es were dardised plication
er of the ecimens alculated mm/min. les.
chnique-those of e size of e Dental
used with
within the The self-e lowest
reliable
Scientific
Shear btechniq
AdheseEvoCerstatistictechniqutechniquthe tota
Fig 15: Setch or to
ConcluBulk Fil
c Documenta
bond strenques. R&D
e Universal ram and Tcally significue. The bue and as wl-etch group
Shear bond sotal-etch tec
sion: Simill within sub
ation Adhese
gth with TeSchaan, O
was testedTetric EvoCcant differenbond strengwould be exp. The value
strengths of Ichnique with A
ar results wstrate and e
e® Universal
etric FamilyOctober 201
d with the ICeram Bulknce betweegth to denxpected, thees shown a
Ivoclar VivadAdhese Univ
with all Tetricetching tech
y composi13
Ivoclar Vivak Fill. As ten the compntin was coe bond strenare the imme
dent composversal. R&D
c EvoFlow, hnique.
tes – Self-e
adent compthe graph posites for omparable ngths to enaediate value
site materialsSchaan, Oct
Tetric EvoC
etch and to
posites, Tetbelow shoeach indiviindepende
amel were ses after bon
to dentin antober 2013
Ceram and
Page
otal-etch
tric EvoFlowows, there idual substrent of the somewhat hnding.
nd enamel af
Tetric EvoC
e 25 of 42
w, Tetric was no
rate and etching
higher in
fter self-
Ceram
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 26 of 42
Shear bond strength to enamel substrate. Shear bond strength to dentin substrate. M Irie, Okayama University Japan
and
Marginal sealability of modern self-etch adhesives in composite restorations. M Irie, J Tanaka, T Matsumoto, Y Maruo, G Nishigawa, S Minagi, D Watts*. Okayama University Japan, *University of Manchester UK. Abstract accepted: AADR Charlotte USA, March 2014
Irie investigated shear bond strengths to human enamel and dentin substrates when bonding the composite Clearfil AP-X/Kuraray with the following “universal” composites: Adhese Universal, Scotchbond Universal/3M ESPE, Prime & Bond Elect/Dentsply, OptiBond XTR/Kerr, All-Bond Universal/Bisco and BeautiBond Multi/Shofu. After application of the adhesives according to manufacturer instructions, a Teflon mould was clamped to the substrate surfaces and filled with the composite. Shear bond strength values were measured immediately after light-curing and after one day storage in water at 37°C. The table below shows the shear bond strength values after one day storage.
Fig. 16: Shear bond strengths of various “universal” adhesives when used with the self-etch and total-etch techniques. M Irie, Okayama University, December 2013
(Optibond XTR not indicated for total etch technique) Irie et al also investigated the percentage of perfect margins i.e. no marginal gap when bonding the composite Clearfil AP-X/Kuraray with various modern self-etch and “universal” adhesives: Prime&Bond Elect/Dentsply, Scotchbond Universal/3M ESPE, OptiBond XTR/Kerr, G-aenial Bond/GC, BeautiBond Multi/Shofu, Bond Force/Tokuyama and Clearfil SE Bond 2/Kuraray
Cylindrical Class I cavities (diameter 3.5 mm, depth 1.5 mm) were placed in premolars. A restorative procedure was performed according to manufacturer instructions. The restored tooth was polished immediately after light-curing and marginal gap formation was assessed using a microscope (x 400) and expressed as a percentage of the measured teeth (n=10 per group).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Dentin Enamel Dentin Enamel
SELF-ETCH TOTAL-ETCH
She
ar b
ond
stre
ngth
MP
a
Adhese Universal Scotchbond Universal Prime & Bond Elect
Optibond XTR All Bond Universal BeautiBond Multi
Scientific
Fig. 17: et al. IAD
Conclutechniquexhibitethan Adstudies,howeve13. Of tBond 2
c Documenta
Percentage DR abstract,
sion: Adheue (equal
ed the lowedhese Univ, the bond s
er this is nothe teeth bshowed a h
ation Adhese
of teeth with March 2014
ese Universto Optibonst values u
versal in thestrengths to
ot seen acroonded withhigher perce
e® Universal
perfect marg4.
sal exhibitend XTR onunder all cire self-etch o enamel woss the boah Adhese Uentage in th
ginal integrity
ed the highn enamel rcumstance
mode andwere highesard e.g. The
Universal 60his investiga
y when bond
hest bond sin self-etch
es and was d total-etch st for all proe Dental Ad0% had peration.
ded with vario
strengths inh mode). A
statisticallymode on
oducts in thedvisor studyrfect margin
Page
ous adhesive
ndependentAll Bond Uy significantdentin. As e total etchy depicted ns, only Cle
e 27 of 42
es. M.Irie
t of etch Universal tly lower in most
h mode - in figure earfil SE
Scientific
8.2.2 CAdheserestoratand thealike. 31 substansame cstandar
Compo
Adheseof comp
Method(n=15) represeembeddcooling,for 20 slayer warepair-cfor 20 s37°C antests wesurface
Results
Fig. 18: composi
All the strengthundergo
Conclusubstratall agedrepairs.
c Documenta
Compositee Universaltions. Daily e abrasive The interfa
nces have dircumstance
rd part of da
osite repair
e Universal wposite filling
d: Composiand Tetric
ent aged-coded in resin, then rinse
seconds befas light-cure
composite. Iseconds witnd thermocere carried instead of t
s:
Shear bondite materials.
compositesh exceededoing cohesiv
sion: Thtes/composd-composite
ation Adhese
e repair – bl is indicawear and tforces of
ace of dentdifferent coes/exposure
aily dental p
r with Adhe
was tested s.
ite disc samEvoCeram
omposite, tn. The compd and driedfore being ded for 10 seIt was applih Bluephasycled (1000out accordtooth subst
d strengths w. R&D Schaa
s achieved d the coheve failure in
here was sites. Respee substrate
e® Universal
bond strengted for thetear due to occlusion atin and enaefficients oe. Chipping
practice.
ese Univers
as regards
mples madm (n=15) (d
he discs wposite surfad. Adhese Udispersed weconds withied in one ise Style. Th0x) before bing to ISO rate).
with Adhesean, Decembe
shear bondesive stren
n the test.
no staectable bons supportin
gths to agee repair osaliva, ther
and masticmel and re
of thermal eg, breakage
sal. R&D S
its suitabili
e of Tetricdiameter 20were storedace was sanUniversal wawith compreh Bluephasencrement o
he samples being tested29022 (usi
e Universal aer 2013
d strength ngth of the
atistically nd strengthsng the suita
ed composof fracturedrmal chang
cation, affecestorative mexpansion ae and thus c
chaan, Dec
ty as a bon
c EvoCeram0 mm, heigd for 3 monded using as applied tssed air to
e Style. Tetronto the adhwere then sd for bond ng the com
and Tetric E
values of ae material
significant s were achieability of Ad
ite materiad composite, foodstuffct teeth an
materials is dand react dcomposite r
cember 201
ding agent
m Bulk Fill ht 2 mm) w
onths in waP400 SiC
to the compa thin film-lric EvoCerahesive surfastored for 2strength. S
mposite surfa
voCeram to
around 25-2with 100%
differenceved with T
dhese Unive
Page
al te and cofs of varyin
nd dental mdynamic – ifferently un
repair is the
13
for the dire
(n=14), Hewere prepaater at 37°paper unde
posite discsayer. The a
am was useface and lig24 hours in Shear bond ace as the
o three differ
26 MPa. T% of the
ce betweeTetric EvoCersal for co
e 28 of 42
ompomer g acidity
materials different nder the erefore a
ect repair
eliomolar ared. To °C, then er water-s and left adhesive ed as the ht-cured water at strength bonding
rent aged
he bond samples
en the eram on
omposite
Scientific
8.3 A
Adhesemateriaalthougmode, tand enamodes.
Fig. 19: S(LC) mod
Conclucure mo
c Documenta
Adhese Un
e Universal l MultiCore h the valuethe differencamel using The values
Shear bond de on dentin
sion: Comode, using b
ation Adhese
niversal and
was also Flow, in bo
es in light-cuce is not stathe total-et
s shown are
strengths of n and ename
patibility wiboth self-etc
e® Universal
d core buil
tested togeoth self-cureure mode aatistically sich techniqu
e the immed
Adhese Univl. R&D Scha
ith MultiCorch and total
ld up mate
ether with re and light-are consisteignificant. Tue for MultiCdiate values
versal plus Maa, October 2
re core buill-etch techn
rials
the self-cu-cure mode
ently higher The bond stCore Flow is after bond
MultiCore Flo2013
ld up materniques.
uring compo. The graphthan those
trengths wen both self-ing.
ow in self-cur
rial in both
Page
osite core h below sho using the s
ere higher o-cure and li
re (SC) and l
self-cure a
e 29 of 42
build-up ows that self-cure
on dentin ght-cure
light-cure
and light-
Scientific
8.4 A
8.4.1 To assethe lutin(see alsmode (Dcuring m The graUniverslight-curhours st
Fig. 20: Sself-etchluting co
Concluon dent
c Documenta
Adhese Un
Bond streness performng composiso the scheDC) i.e. themode (LC) i
aph below sal accordinre mode - atorage in wa
Shear bond h and total-etomposite. R&
sion: Constin and enam
ation Adhese
niversal and
ngth mance with i
te Variolinkematic diage base and .e. using th
shows theg to the se
as indicatedater at 37°C
strengths of tch technique
&D Schaan, J
sistent bondmel, indepe
e® Universal
d indirect r
ndirect restk II. Bond sgram in figucatalyst pae base pas
e shear bolf-etch and in the instr
C. The shea
Adhese Unives. Variolink January 2014
d strengths oendent of the
restoration
toratives, Astrength testure 7b). Varstes were m
ste only.
nd strengthtotal-etch t
ructions for ar bond stre
versal plus Vwas either u4
of Adhese Ue curing mo
ns
dhese Univts were carriolink II wamixed prior
hs to dentiechniques ause. The va
engths were
Variolink II onused as a ligh
Universal pode.
versal was trried out acas used in to applicat
n and enaand Variolinalues were e high in all
n dentin and ht curing (LC
lus Variolin
Page
tested togetccording ISOboth in duaion; and in
amel using nk II in duameasured situations.
enamel usinC) or dual cur
k II luting ce
e 30 of 42
ther with O 29022 al-curing the light
Adhese l-cure or after 24-
ng the ring (DC)
ement
Scientific
8.4.2 ImImmediabondingtakes ptechniquimprovedentin s InfluencSchaan An inteimmediapetroleu Methodlight-cur(n=5). Tweeks iwas clewas rinsout usinrestorat Result
Fig. 21: using eittempora There wglycerin Concluof tempno signithe teet
c Documenta
mmediate Date dentin sg agent, priolace when ue” Magne ed bond strsensitivity. 3
ce of tempn, August 2
ernal investate dentin um jelly as i
d: To mimicred. Ten saThe temporan water at 3
eaned usingsed off andng Adhese tion. As a re
s:
Shear bondther glycerinry cementati
was no irrevne gel or Va
sion: Adheporary restoificant differth undergoin
ation Adhese
Dentin Sealsealing (IDSor to impresseating thecarried out
rengths, few32
porary cem2013
tigation in sealing invisolation ma
c the clinicaamples wereary cement37°C. The tg a rotating d the surfac
Universal eference, fif
d strength vane gel or Vaion. R&D Sc
versible conaseline or du
ese Universrations. All rence betweng immedia
e® Universal
ing / Dual S) refers to ssion takinge final restot a review iwer gap for
mentation o
Schaan teolving the aterials. No
al situation, e covered wt Telio CS Ltemporary mbrush and e blown witand Variol
fteen sampl
alues to dentaseline comphaan, Augus
ntaminationue to the 2-w
sal is suitabof the bondeen the refe
ate dentin se
Bonding Tthe immed
g for the indoration has in 2005 tharmations, d
on the bon
ested the euse of eithnegative ef
Adhese Unwith a fine lLink was apmaterial wasProxyt fineth disperseink II in dues were pre
tin after immpared to a cst 2013
n of the adhweek water
ble for sealids strength erence teetealing and t
Technique aiate applica
direct restoralso led to
at concludedecreased b
nd strength
effect on ber Liquid Sffects were
niversal waslayer of eithpplied and ts then remo prophy pad air. Stand
ual-cure moepared with
mediate denticontrol witho
hesive surfar storage.
ing cavity svalues werh (no IDS otemporary c
and bond sation and poation. The fthe expres
d that IDS abacterial lea
h of Adhes
ond strengStrip glycerifound.
s applied toher glycerinthe sampleoved and thste for 15 sdard bondinode - as if out tempora
n sealing/temut immediate
ace due to
surfaces befre over 30 Mor temporarycementation
Page
strength olymerisatiofurther bondssion “dual appears to akage and
se Univers
gth of carryine gel or V
o bovine dene (n=5) or es were storhe adhesiveseconds. Thng was then
for the perary cement
mporary cemte dentin sea
contact wi
fore the apMPa and thry cementatn.
e 31 of 42
on of the ding that bonding achieve reduced
al. R&D
ying out Vaseline
entin and vaseline red for 2 e surface he paste n carried rmanent tation.
mentation aling and
th either
plication here was tion) and
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 32 of 42
8.4.3 Film-thickness and accuracy of fit Investigation of film-layer thickness of Adhese Universal using white light interferometry. R&D Schaan May 2013
Adhesive layer thickness is an issue when seating indirect restorations. Adhese Universal is always “thinned out” with dispersed air (which is aided by the inclusion of thixotropic silica) and subsequently light cured before seating indirect restorations – eliminating the need for an additional dual-cure activator (DCA). Curing Adhese Universal immobilises the acid monomers and allows good polymerisation at the adhesive-cement interface without a DCA. As shown below, the cured adhesive exhibits a layer thickness of < 10µm on bovine dentin enabling the seating of even very tight-fitting indirect restorations.
Figure 22a represents a tooth surface (as seen from above) embedded in resin, which has been coated with Adhese Universal, dispersed with air and light cured. After curing, any unpolymerised material (inhibition layer) was rinsed away with ethanol. The film-thickness profile was calculated via the use of white light interferometry. This is a non-contact optical method for surface height measurement on 3-D structures with surface profiles varying between a few micrometers and a few centimeters. The pale circular ring around the outside of figure 22a shows where the adhesive rises in height due to the blowing action. Figure 22b depicts this profile graphically. At the very left the level is set at 0 where the tooth surface has no adhesive. Left and right the profile is also higher (graphically equivalent to the pale ring in figure 22a) representing how the layer was blown to the sides. The middle of the graph however (which represents the clinical situation) shows a consistently low film thickness of <10µm.
Fig. 22a-b Adhesive Universal layer on tooth surface sample viewed from above (left) and film-layer thickness profile (right). R&D Schaan, May 2013
Conclusion: The investigation shows the thin film-layer thickness of Adhese Universal consistent with providing for accuracy of fit with indirect restorations. The graph also emphasizes the importance of dispersing the adhesive with oil and moisture-free compressed air until a glossy immobile film layer results – as indicated in the instructions for use.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 33 of 42
Marginal gap formation and accuracy of fit with indirect restorations. R&D Schaan, October 2013
The influence of Adhese Universal on accuracy of fit when used for bonding indirect restorations was investigated by three Ivoclar Vivadent dentists. Nine extracted, caries-free human molars of similar size (3 per dentist) were prepared with inlay cavities of the same size. Inlays were prepared using IPS e.max Press (LT), (spacer: Tru Fit Stumpflack/G. Taub Dental was used) and fitted to the cavities. With the non-adhesively-fixed inlay in each tooth, a mould and plaster die of each was made. This was used as a baseline model to quantify any changes in marginal gap after adhesive bonding. The 9 teeth were treated with Adhese Universal, according to the instructions for use and light-cured. Variolink II cement was applied to the pre-treated inlays and the inlays were placed and cured with Bluephase Style for 20 seconds in the cavities. Further moulds and plaster dies of the adhesively-bonded inlays were made for comparison. Both dies were scanned using an es1 scanner, compared and differences in the marginal gap recorded and assessed. As shown in table 8 none of the teeth exhibited an increase in marginal gap over 50 µm (related to the application of both the adhesive and the cement) which was set as the acceptance limit for not negatively affecting accuracy of fit. Inlay Dentist 1 Dentist 2 Dentist 3
1 45 µm 30 µm 40 µm
2 15 µm 30 µm 45 µm
3 10 µm 25 µm 15 µm
Table 8: Increase in marginal gap size after bonding IPS e.max Press inlays with Adhese Universal and Variolink II for different dentists/teeth. R&D Schaan, October 2013
There was no excessive increase in marginal gap size after bonding tests together with Variolink II i.e. no negative effect on accuracy of fit. Conclusion: Minimal marginal gap increase supports the thin film-building qualities of Adhese Universal and thus its suitability for use with indirect restorations.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 34 of 42
8.5 Adhese Universal – dentin penetration: bond and desensitisation An ultra-morphological characterization of dentin using an experimental adhesive – Adhese Universal: Final Report. M. Lopes. University of Lisbon, Portugal. August 2013 Manuela Lopes, at the University of Lisbon, studied the ultra-morphological effects of Adhese Universal on dentin using electron microscopy.
Method: 56 extracted human molars (refrigerated in a solution of 0.5% chloramine for up to one month post-extraction) were used in this study. Teeth were left in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours, then the occlusal enamel was removed with an Isomet 1000 diamond saw (Buehler Ltd) and 56 dentin discs with a thickness of 800 ± 200 µm were obtained from middle dentin by slow speed sectioning. A standard smear layer was created on the occlusal surface by wet sanding with 600-grit SiC sandpaper for 60 seconds. Adhese Universal was applied to the dentin surfaces and specimens were randomly divided into 4 equal (n=14) groups.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
Self-Etch Total-Etch
Dry Wet Dry Wet
Dentin dried with compressed air for 5 s
Excess water blotted using moist cotton pellet
Phosphoric acid applied for 15 s and rinsed off for 10 s.
Dried with compressed air for 5 s
Phosphoric acid applied for 15 s and rinsed off for 10 s.
Excess water blotted using moist cotton
pellet
Adhesive was scrubbed into the dentin surface for 20 s and dispersed with compressed air for 10s
Table 9: Groupings of human teeth according to Self-Etch, Total-Etch and wet or dry techniques. M. Lopes, University of Lisbon, August 2013
After the application of Adhese Universal, a 1 mm thick layer of Tetric EvoFlow was applied to the treated dentin and light-cured for 40 seconds. The discs were then cross-sectioned into two identical halves. One half was examined with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) the other half was assigned to investigation with a transmission electron microscope (TEM) and nano-leakage – made observable by immersing the dentin specimens in silver nitrate.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 35 of 42
Results: (SEM) Both self-etch groups (dry and wet) exhibited a sealed acid-resistant resin-dentin inter-diffusion zone. Adhese Universal penetrated profusely into dentin tubuli up to 100 µm in all specimens analysed (see figure. 23a-b). The hybrid layer was 0.6 - 0.8 µm thick. In both total-etch groups (dry and wet) the hybrid layer was thicker at 3.5 - 5.0 µm, and densely infiltrated (see figure 24a-b). Resin tags were funnel shaped with peri-tubular triangular hybridisation characteristic of most total-etch systems.
(TEM) Both self-etch groups (dry and wet) showed heavy density of hydroxyapatite crystallites inside the hybrid area. In both total-etch groups (dry and wet) the dentin was demineralised to a depth of 3.5 - 5.0 µm, without morphological evidence of hydroxyapatite crystallites in the hybrid layer. The hybrid layer was very well-defined. The resin tags were filled to their entire extension. The least amount of nano-leakage (observable as dark spots of infiltrated silver nitrate) within the hybrid layer was obtained with the self-etch technique (dry and wet).
SELF-ETCH – dry SELF-ETCH - wet
Fig. 23 a-b: SEM of dentin tubuli after application of Adhese Universal using the self-etch technique under dry (left) and wet (right) conditions. M. Lopes, University of Lisbon, August 2013
TOTAL-ETCH – dry TOTAL ETCH - wet
Fig. 24 a-b: SEM of dentin tubuli after application of Adhese Universal using the total-etch technique under dry (left) and wet (right) conditions. M. Lopes, University of Lisbon, August 2013
Conclusion: The SEM photos show relatively uniform sealing/mechanical blockage of the dentin tubuli under all conditions – supporting the ability of Adhese Universal to form a strong bond to dentin whilst providing protection from hypersensitivity. More sealed tubuli are visible in figures 24a-b than figures 23a-b (irrespective of the magnification) due to the total etch technique having removed the smear layer. The similarity between dry and moist substrates supports the lack of technique sensitivity with Adhese Universal.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 36 of 42
9. Clinical Investigations Clinical trials remain the ultimate way to collect scientific evidence on the clinical effectiveness of an adhesive/restorative treatment.33 Currently baseline results from an internal clinical investigation are available. Recalls will be conducted at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years. External clinical investigations are due to commence early 2014.
Baseline Report: Clinical observations with Adhese Universal in Class I and Class II cavities. R&D Clinic Schaan, Liechtenstein. December 2013
Introduction Adhese Universal was applied in the internal clinic at Ivoclar Vivadent. Baseline results are available. The main priority of this observation-study was to monitor Adhese Universal-bonded fillings using the etch & rinse (total-etch) technique in Class I and II cavities - as this technique represents the highest risk with regard to postoperative sensitivity.
Methods
40 etch & rinse i.e. total-etch-technique fillings using Adhese Universal are to be applied to vital teeth via four different internal dentists at Ivoclar Vivadent. 32 restorations have been carried out so far.
Adhesive: The enamel margins of the cavities were conditioned with Total Etch for 30 seconds and the dentin was conditioned for 15 seconds. The etch gel was removed with water and the cavity was dried until a white etch pattern was visible on the enamel. Starting with the enamel, Adhese Universal was then rubbed into the surfaces of the cavity for 20 seconds, dried with air and polymerised with Bluephase Style for 10 seconds. The light in the clinic was dimmed to its lowest level or set to orange-mode.
Composite: An optional layer of Tetric EvoFlow could be applied to the cavity floor which was polymerised separately. All fillings were then completed with Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill in layers with a maximum thickness of 4 mm. Each layer was cured for 10 seconds with Bluephase Style.
The baseline evaluation was carried out by the respective dentist, approximately 1 week after the placement of the filling. A clinical observation was carried out, an evaluation of aesthetic integration and marginal quality and patients were asked of their personal experience regarding post-operative sensitivity and occlusion. FDI evaluation criteria34 were used to rate the restorations i.e. α = clinically excellent, α2= clinically good, β=clinically satisfactory, γ=clinically unsatisfactory (but repairable) and δ= clinically poor (replacement necessary). Any problems with occlusion were checked and corrected if necessary.
Results
The results as relevant to the adhesive are presented here i.e. aspects such as the aesthetic ratings of the fillings are not discussed. Of the 32 fillings applied so far, 13 were Class I and 19 Class II fillings. The choice of delivery form i.e. VivaPen or bottle was left open to the clinician.
Application of Adhese Universal: Application via the VivaPen and brush cannula was seen as unproblematic, as was the use of the bottle delivery form. The viscosity of the material allowed rapid wetting of all required surfaces, a visible thin film was left even after blowing with a very strong stream of air. No pooling of material was observed. Light sensitivity proved unremarkable with no premature polymerisation of the material observed. The composites Tetric EvoFlow and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill were easy to apply on top of the adhesive and exhibited good adaptation
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 37 of 42
Postoperative Sensitivity: After one week all restorations were evaluated as α (100%) i.e. no hypersensitivity/normal vitality after testing by the dentist with cold spray and mechanical disturbance. Patients were also separately asked to give their own opinion regarding postoperative sensitivity within the first week. Thirty reported no hypersensitivity (α) and two patients reported initial sensitivity after placement, which had disappeared by the following day. In these two cases self-assessed postoperative sensitivity was rated as α2 i.e. minimal sensitivity for a limited time period with normal vitality.
Quality of restoration: 25 of 32 fillings were given the top rating α, 7 fillings were rated α2 due to whitish margins despite polishing – these irregularities affected a maximum of 25% of the circumference of the filling. The pictures below show one of the α-rated (after one week) restorations with Adhese Universal:
Fig.25a: Initial situation – insufficient amalgam filling in tooth 26 (mirror image)
Fig. 25b: Application of Adhese Universal
Fig. 25c: Situation after restoration with Adhese Universal and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill. Fissures have been characterised and margins polished.
Fig. 25d: Baseline situation after approximately one week. Perfect (α) margins and clinically faultless performance.
Conclusion
In combination with a standard etch & rinse (total-etch) protocol, Adhese Universal exhibited excellent results in Class I and II cavities. It can be assumed from the baseline data that the adhesive is uncritical with regard to postoperative sensitivity. Application via the VivaPen was smooth and trouble-free.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 38 of 42
10. Biocompatibility
10.1 Introduction
Medical devices are subject to very strict requirements, which are designed to protect patients and operators from any potential biological risks. ISO 10993 “Biological evaluation of medical devices” defines how the biological safety of a medical device is to be evaluated. Furthermore, dental medical devices are subject to ISO 7405 “Preclinical evaluation of biocompatibility of medical devices used in dentistry”. The biocompatibility of Adhese Universal has been examined according to these standards.
10.2 Cytotoxicity
Cytotoxicity refers to the destructive action of a substance or mixture of substances on cells. The XTT assay is used to examine whether or not a substance causes cell death or inhibits cell proliferation in a cell culture. The XTT50 value refers to the concentration of a substance which reduces the cell number by half. The lower the XTT50 concentration of a substance, the more cytotoxic it is.
Uncured Adhese Universal was tested for cytotoxicity in vitro 35. As is to be expected on the basis of its monomer composition, uncured Adhese Universal exhibited cytotoxic potential in the XTT assay with an XTT50 value of 138.1µg/ml. When the adhesive is polymerised, the cytotoxic compounds (monomers) react and are immobilised; i.e. the cytotoxic effect of the uncured adhesive is limited in time. To reduce the risk of any cytotoxic effect on the pulp in very deep cavities, areas close to the pulp must be selectively coated with calcium hydroxide liner (e.g. ApexCal®); and subsequently covered with a pressure-resistant cement (e.g. a glass ionomer cement such as Vivaglass® Liner). Cytotoxicity is common to most dental adhesives in clinical use. Negative effects due to this cytotoxicity however, have not been observed so far. When applied according to the instructions of use, the cytotoxicity of Adhese Universal can be considered acceptable.
10.3 Genotoxicity
Genotoxicity refers to the capability of a substance or a mixture of substances to damage genetic material.
Adhese Universal has been examined regarding its potential gene changing properties via Ames mutagenicity tests 36. Adhese Universal did not induce gene mutations by base pair changes or frameshifts in the genome of the strains used. Adhese Universal is not considered genotoxic.
10.4 Sensitisation and irritation
Like all resin-based dental materials, Adhese Universal contains methacrylate and acrylate derivatives. Such materials may have an irritating effect and may cause sensitisation. This can lead to allergic contact dermatitis. Allergic reactions are extremely rare in patients but are increasingly observed in dental personnel, who handle uncured composite material on a daily basis.37-43. These reactions can be minimized by clean working conditions and avoiding contact of unpolymerised material with the skin. Commonly employed gloves, made of latex or vinyl, do not provide effective protection against sensitisation to such compounds.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal Page 39 of 42
Conclusion
Having tested the toxicity and mutagenicity of Adhese Universal, the following conclusions can be drawn:
Uncured Adhese Universal is cytotoxic due to its monomer composition. After polymerisation, the monomers are immobilised within the polymer network, thus the cytotoxic effect is reduced shortly after application of the adhesive.
Adhese Universal, particularly in the uncured state may cause sensitisation to methacrylates. This is typical for all resin-based dental materials.
According to the data available Adhese Universal is not genotoxic. In summary, Adhese Universal is safe for use in humans if it is used according to the instructions given. Possible side effects, such as the sensitising property of methacrylates, occur infrequently in patients and the risk is negligible compared to the overall benefit of Adhese Universal.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal 40 of 42
11. References
1. Kugel G. J Am Dent Assoc 131, No suppl 1 20S-25S
2. Bowen R L. Dental filling material comprising vinyl silane treated fused silica and a binder consisting of the reaction product of Bis phenol and glycidyl acrylate. 1962; Patent No: 3,066,112.
3. Eisenmann D R (1998). Enamel structure. In: Oral Histology Development, Structure and Function. A R Ten Cate editor. St. Louis: Mosby, pp. 218-235.
4. Schroeder H E. Oral Structural Biology. Thieme; New York 1991
5. Alhadainy H A, Abdalla AI. 2-year clinical evaluation of dentin bonding systems. Am J Dent 1996; 9: 77-79.
6. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Verschueren M, Gladys S, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Clinical status of ten dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1994; 73: 1690-1702.
7. Gwinnett A J. Quantitative contribution of resin infiltration/hybridization to dentin bonding. Am J Dent 1993; 6:7-9.
8. Gwinnett AJ. Dentin bond strength after air drying and rewetting. Am J Dent 1994; 7: 144-148.
9. Buonocore M G. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955; 34: 849-853.
10. Silverstone L M, Saxton C A, Dogon I L, Fejerskov O. Variation in the pattern of acid etching of human dental enamel examined by scanning electron microscopy. Caries Res 1975; 9 (5): 373-387
11. Perdigao J, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeen B, Tome A R, Vanherle G, Lopes A B. Morphological field emission-SEM study of the effect of six phosphoric acid etching agents on human dentin. Dent Mater 1996; 12: 262-71
12. Pashley D H, Ciucci B, Sano H, Horner J A. Permeability of dentin to adhesive agents. Quintessence Int. 1993; 24: 618-631
13. Van Meerbeek B, Vargas S, Inoue S, Yoshida Y, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Adhesives and cements to promote preservation dentistry. Operative Dentistry 2001. (Supplement 6) 119-144
14. Hashimoto M, Tay F R, Svizero N R, de Gee A J, Feilzer A J, Sano H, Kaga M, Pashley D H. The effects of common errors on sealing ability of total-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 560-568.
15. van Dijken J W, Sunnegardh-Gronberg K. A four-year clinical evaluation of a highly filled hybrid resin composite in posterior cavities. J Adhes Dent 2005; 7: 343-349.
16. Knitter K, Lösche GM, Blunck U. Effectiveness of Excite/Tetric Ceram in Class-II-restorations after three years. J Dent Res 2005; 84 (Spec Is B):Abstract# 0333.
17. Buonocore M G. Principles of adhesive retention and adhesive restorative materials. J. Am Dent Assoc. 1963 Sep; 67: 382-91.
18. Huget E F, Denniston J C, Vilca J M. Dentin adhesives: a perspective. Military Medicine 1979; 144: 619-620
19. Crim G A, Swartz M L Phillips R W. An evaluation of cavosurface design and microleakage. Gen Dent 1984; 32: 56-58
20. GfK Healthcare. DDM Jahresbericht 2010. Ivoclar Vivadent. Chairside Bereich
21. GfK Healthcare. ZaBus IV/2010
22. GfK Healthcare. DDM Bericht – 1 Halbjahr 2013. September 2013
23. Frankenberger R, Schipper H M, Roggendorf M J. Adhäsivtechnik 2010 – Etch and Rinse oder Self Etch Systeme? Quintessenz 2010; 61 (5): 537-542
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal 41 of 42
24. Ozer F, Blatz MB. Self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems in clinical dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2013 Jan;34 (1):12-4, 16, 18
25. Cardoso M V, Yoshida Yasuhiro, Van Meerbeek B. Adhesion to tooth enamel and dentin – a view on the latest technology and future perspectives. Chapter 3 from: Roulet J-F, Kappert H F. Statements – Diagnostics and therapy in dental medicine today and in the future. Quintessenz Publishing 2009
26. Frankenberger R. Adhäsivtechnik 2009 – Neuigkeiten Tipps und Trends. Quintessenz 2009; 60 (4) 415-423
27. The Dental Advisor. Understanding the newest generation of adhesives : Universal Bonding Agents. March 2013 Vol. 30, No.2.
28. Lehmann F, Kern M. Beständigkeit des Klebeverbundes zu Lithiumdisilikatkeramik bei Verwendung verschiedener Primer/Klebersysteme. Endbericht.
29. Haller B, Blunck U. Übersicht und Wertung der aktuellen Bonding-systeme. ZM 2003; 93 (7): 48-58
30. Brännström M, Linden LÅ, Åstrom A: The hydrodynamics of the dental tubule and of pulp fluid. A discussion of its significance in relation to dentinal sensitivity. Caries Res. 1967; 1: 310-317.
31. Croll T P, Donly KJ. Resin-based Composite Margin Repair. Inside Dentistry. 2008, 4, 6
32. Magne P. Immediate dentin sealing: A fundamental procedure for indirect bonded restorations. J of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2005. 17;3:144-154
33. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: A systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 864-881.
34. Hickel R, Peschke A, Tyas M, Mjör I, Bayne S, Peters M, Hiller KA, Randall R, Vanherle G, Heintze SD. FDI World Dental Federation - clinical criteria for the evaluation of direct and indirect restorations. Update and clinical examples. J Adhes Dent. 2010 Aug;12 (4):259-72.
35. Heppenheimer A. Cytotoxicity assay in vitro (XTT-Test). Harlan Report No. 1543002. 2013.
36. Sokolowski A. Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli reverse mutation assay. Harlan CCR Report No. 1543001. 2013.
37. Geurtsen W. Biocompatibility of resin-modified filling materials. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2000; 11: 333-335.
38. Munksgaard EC, Hansen EK, Engen T, Holm U. Self-reported occupational dermatological reactions among Danish dentists. Eur J Oral Sci 1996; 104: 396-402.
39. Sasseville D. Acrylates in contact dermatitis. Dermatitis 2012;23:6-16.
40. Geukens S, Goosens A. Occupational contact allergy to (meth)acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 2001;44:153-159.
41. Kiec-Swiercynska M. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis due to acrylates in Lodz. Contact Dermatitis 1996;34:419-422.
42. Aalto-Korte K, Alanko K, Kuuliala O, Jolanki R. Methacrylate and acrylate allergy in dental personnel. Contact Dermatitis 2007;57:324-330.
43. Kallus T, Mjor IA. Incidence of adverse effects of dental materials. Scand Journal of Dental Research 1991;99:236-240.
Scientific Documentation Adhese® Universal 42 of 42
We take no responsibility for the accuracy, validity or reliability of information provided by third parties. We accept no liability regarding the use of the information, even if we have been advised to the contrary. Use of the information is entirely at your own risk. It is provided “as-is” or “as received” without any explicit or implicit warranty, including (without limitation) merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, or regarding (without limitation) usability or suitability for a particular purpose.
The information is provided free of charge. Neither we, nor any party associated with us are liable for any incidental, direct, indirect, specific, special or punitive damages (including but not limited to lost data, loss of use, or any costs of procuring substitute information) arising from your or another’s use/non-use of the information, even if we or our representatives are informed of the possibility thereof. Ivoclar Vivadent AG Research and Development Scientific Services Bendererstrasse 2 FL - 9494 Schaan Liechtenstein Contents: Joanna-C. Todd / Dr Erik Braziulis Issued: January 2014