The immediate bonding effectiveness of contemporary adhesives is quite favorable, regardless of the approach used. In the long term, the bonding effectiveness of some adhesives drops dramatically, whereas the bond strengths of other adhesives are more stable. This review examines the fundamental processes that cause the adhesion of biomaterials to enamel and dentin to degrade with time. Non-carious class V clinical trials remain the ultimate test method for the assessment of bonding effectiveness, but in addition to being high-cost, they are time- and labor-consuming, and they provide little information on the true cause of clinical failure. Therefore, several laboratory protocols were developed to predict bond durability. This paper critically appraises methodologies that focus on chemical degradation patterns of hydrolysis and elution of interface components, as well as mechanically oriented test set-ups, such as fatigue and fracture toughness measurements. A correlation of in vitro and in vivo data revealed that, currently, the most validated method to assess adhesion durability involves aging of micro-specimens of biomaterials bonded to either enamel or dentin. After about 3 months, all classes of adhesives exhibited mechanical and morphological evidence of degradation that resembles in vivo aging effects. A comparison of contemporary adhesives revealed that the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives remain the 'gold standard' in terms of durability. Any kind of simplification in the clinical application procedure results in loss of bonding effectiveness. Only the two-step self-etch adhesives approach the gold standard and do have some additional clinical benefits.

http://www.endoexperience.com/documents/DeMunketalDurabiltyofadhesionJDR.pdf

A Critical Review of the Durability of Adhesion to Tooth Tissue: Methods and Results

Bonding to tooth tissue can be achieved through an "etch&rinse," "self-etch" or "glass-ionomer" approach. In this paper, the basic bonding mechanism to enamel and dentin of these three approaches is demonstrated by means of ultramorphological and chemical characterization of tooth-biomaterial interfacial interactions. Furthermore, bond-strength testing and measurement of marginal-sealing effectiveness (the two most commonly employed methodologies to determine "bonding effectiveness" in the laboratory) are evaluated upon their value and relevance in predicting clinical performance. A new dynamic methodology to test biomaterial-tooth bonds in a fatigue mode is introduced with a recently developed micro-rotary fatigue-testing device. Eventually, today's adhesives will be critically weighted upon their performance in diverse laboratory studies and clinical trials. Special attention has been given to the benefits/drawbacks of an etch&rinse versus a self-etch approach and the long-term performance of these adhesives. Correlating data gathered in the laboratory with clinical results clearly showed that laboratory research CAN predict clinical effectiveness. Although there is a tendency to simplify bonding procedures, the data presented confirm that conventional three-step etch&rinse adhesives still perform most favorably and are most reliable in the long-term. Nevertheless, a self-etch approach may have the best future perspective. Clinically, when adhesives no longer require an "etch&rinse" step, the application time, and probably more importantly, the technique-sensitivity are substantially reduced. Especially "mild," two-step self-etch adhesives that bond through a combined micromechanical and chemical interaction with tooth tissue closely approach conventional three-step systems in bonding performance.

Buonocore memorial lecture, adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges

Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives

Dental adhesion review: Aging and stability of the bonded interface

http://webdelprofesor.ula.ve/odontologia/robertramirez/PDF/1.pdf

State of the art of self-etch adhesives

The bonding effectiveness of restorative materials to tooth tissue is typically measured statically. Clinically tooth/composite bonds are however subjected to cyclic sub-critical loads. Therefore, in vitro fatigue testing of dental adhesives should predict better the in vivo performance of adhesives. The objective of this study was to determine the fatigue resistance of two representative adhesives, a self-etch and an etch&rinse adhesive, bonded to enamel and dentin. Therefore, tooth/composite interfaces were cyclically loaded using a miniaturized version of a rotating beam fatigue testing device. Subsequently, the load at which 50% of the specimens fail after 10(5) cycles, was determined as the median micro-rotary fatigue resistance (microRFR). For both adhesives, the microRFR was about 30-40% lower than the corresponding micro-tensile bond strength (microTBS) to both enamel and dentin. Analysis of the fracture surfaces by Feg-SEM revealed typical fatigue fracture patterns. It is concluded that resin/tooth interfaces are vulnerable to progressive damage by sub-critical loads, with the 3-step etch&rinse adhesive being more resistant to fatigue than the 2-step self-etch adhesive.

Micro-rotary fatigue of tooth-biomaterial interfaces

Influence of dentin cavity surface finishing on micro-tensile bond strength of adhesives

Adhesion mechanism of self-etching adhesives

Functional monomer impurity affects adhesive performance.

The objective of this study was to compare the one-week bonding effectiveness of nine contemporary composite cements used to lute ceramic to dentin and to determine an appropriate processing method for pretesting failures. The microtensile bond strengths (µTBS) of different luting agents including five self-adhesive cements (Unicem, 3 M ESPE; Maxcem, Kerr; Monocem, Shofu; G-Cem, GC; and Multilink Sprint, Ivoclar-Vivadent), two self-etch cements (Panavia F2.0 and Clearfil Esthetic Cement, Kuraray), and two etch-and-rinse cements (Calibra, Dentsply, and Variolink II, Ivoclar-Vivadent) were measured using a standardized protocol. As control, a two-step self-etch adhesive combined with a restorative composite (Clearfil SE+Clearfil APX, Kuraray) were included as luting material. Depending on the processing of the pretesting failures, two groups of cements could be distinguished: (1) those with low bond strength and many pretesting failures and (2) those with relatively high bond strength and few pretesting failures. Nevertheless, the control luting procedure involving a self-etch adhesive combined with a restorative composite presented with a significantly higher µTBS. The µTBS was clearly product-dependent rather than being dependent on the actual adhesive approach. Fracture analysis indicated that failure usually occurred at the dentin–cement interface especially for the cements with low bond strength and many pretesting failures. Depending on the cement system, an adequate immediate ceramic-to-dentin bond strength can be obtained, even with self-adhesive cements that do not use a separate dental adhesive. Yet, the self-etch adhesive Clearfil SE combined with the restorative composite revealed a superior bonding performance and should therefore be preferred in clinical situations where the restoration transmits light sufficiently.

Bart Van Meerbeek

Papers

Micro-rotary fatigue of tooth-biomaterial interfaces

Influence of dentin cavity surface finishing on micro-tensile bond strength of adhesives

Adhesion mechanism of self-etching adhesives

Functional monomer impurity affects adhesive performance.

Immediate bonding effectiveness of contemporary composite cements to dentin