Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAlcántara-Obispo, E.
dc.contributor.authorSantander-Rengifo, F.
dc.contributor.authorLadera-Castañeda, M.
dc.contributor.authorLópez-Gurreonero, C.
dc.contributor.authorCastro Pérez-Vargas, A.
dc.contributor.authorCornejo-Pinto, A.
dc.contributor.authorCervantes-Ganoza, L.
dc.contributor.authorCayo-Rojas, C.
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-31T18:37:45Z
dc.date.available2025-10-31T18:37:45Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12805/5553
dc.description.abstractThe success and longevity of a resin composite restoration is determined by its good bonding to the tooth structure, with the adhesion being a challenge to dentin due to its complexity and structural heterogeneity. The present study aimed to compare the adhesive strength of dentin conditioned with 18% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) versus 35% phosphoric acid (H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf>) in human premolars. Materials and Methods: This in vitro experimental study was performed on 40 human premolars. The occlusal thirds were sectioned and randomly placed into four groups according to the type of dentin conditioning: Group 1 (control), Group 2 (18% EDTA), Group 3 (35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf>) and Group 4 (18% EDTA plus 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf>). Then, 10,000 thermocycles between 5 +/− 2 °C and 55 +/− 2 °C were applied. Adhesive strength was tested by shearing with a digital universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/min. The values obtained were analyzed in megapascals (MPa). The mean and standard deviation were used as measures of central tendency and dispersion. In addition, a one-factor intergroup ANOVA test was applied with Tukey’s post hoc test considering a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: The 18% EDTA and 18% EDTA plus 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf> showed significantly higher adhesive strength compared to the control group that did not receive dentin conditioning (p = 0.047 and p < 0.001, respectively). However, the group conditioned with 18% EDTA did not present significant differences compared to the group conditioned with 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf> (p = 0.997). In addition, the group conditioned with 18% EDTA plus 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf> showed significantly higher adhesive strength compared to the groups conditioned with 18% EDTA (p = 0.002) and 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf> (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The adhesion of bulk fill resin composite to dentin was favorable when preconditioning was performed using 18% EDTA followed by 35% H<inf>3</inf>PO<inf>4</inf>. In contrast, when both etchants were used separately, the bulk fill resin composite showed similar bond strength values in both cases, but significantly lower compared to their sequential application.en_US
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherMDPI
dc.relation.ispartofurn:issn:2073-4360
dc.rightshttps://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.subjectMechanical Strength and Bonding in Dental Materialsen_US
dc.subjectAdhesive Strength and Dentin Bonding Innovationsen_US
dc.titleAdhesive Strength in Dentin Conditioned with 18% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid versus 35% Phosphoric Acid: In Vitro Study with 1-Year Artificial Agingen_US
dc.typehttps://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/polym14204291
dc.subject.ocdehttps://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.02.14
dc.type.otherResearch article
dc.identifier.journalPolymers
dc.type.versionhttps://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2