The Progression of Dental AdhesivesA Peer-Reviewed Publication
Written by Ara Nazarian, DDS
www.ineedce.com
Educational Objectives
Upon completion of this course, the clinician will be able
to do the following:
1. Be knowledgeable about the evolution of
bonding adhesives
2. Know the attributes of an ideal bonding agent
3. Be knowledgeable about the properties of the
seventh-generation adhesives and the advantages
they offer
4. Know the applications that seventh-generation adhe
-
sives can be used for and understand the techniques
that should be used
Abstract
There has been dramatic progression in the adhesion of
dental adhesives and resins to enamel and dentin in the 40
years since Buonocore
introduced the technique of etching
enamel with phosphoric acid to improve adhesion to enamel.
The first dental adhesives bonded resins to enamel only,
with little or no dentin adhesion. Subsequent generations
have dramatically improved bond strength to dentin and
the sealing of dentin margins while retaining a strong bond
to enamel. With more patients demanding metal-free den
-
tistry, the use of dental resins as cements as well as direct and
indirect restorations will continue to increase. This article
discusses the progression of dental adhesives up to the most
recent generation, in which all components are contained
in a single bottle or unit-dose container and applied using a
one-step technique that requires no mixing.
Overview
Over the past 45 years, dental bonding systems have evolved
with variations in chemistry, application, mechanism, tech
-
nique, and effectiveness. This evolution accompanied the
development of improved esthetic dental materials, notably
composite resin and ceramic, and an increasing demand by
patients for esthetic dentistry. In 1999, approximately 86
million direct resin restorations were placed. With respect
to indirect restorations, approximately 2.5 million veneers,
38 million resin/ceramic crowns, and 1.1 million ceramic/
porcelain inlays were placed, in addition to metal-based
crowns and bridges and core/post and core build-ups.
All direct resin restorations require bonding, and indirect
restorations either require or are candidates for bonding. As
the demand for bonded esthetic restorations has continued
to increase, the evolution of bonding agents has accelerated.
Let us quickly review dental adhesives according to a series
of generations, allowing us to understand the characteristics
of each group.
All direct resin restorations
require bonding
History of Bonding Agents
First and Second Generation
The first- and second-generation bonding agents used
during the 1960s and 1970s did not recommend etching
the dentin, but instead relied on adhesion to the attached
smear layer.
The weak bond strength (2MPa–6MPa) to
the smear layer still allowed dentin leakage with clinical
margin stain.
Third Generation
The third-generation systems of the 1980s introduced
acid etching of dentin and a separate primer designed to
penetrate the dentin tubules as a method to increase bond
strength.
These systems increased bond strength to dentin
(12MPa–15MPa) and decreased dentin margin failure. With
time, however, margin staining caused clinical failure.
Fourth Generation
The fourth-generation adhesive systems of the early 1990s
used chemistry that penetrated both etched and decalcified
dentin tubules and dentin substrate, forming a “hybrid”
layer of collagen and resin. Fusayama
and Nakabayashi
described the penetration of resin into dentin as giving high
bond strengths and a dentin seal. In fact, Kanca
introduced
the idea of “wet bonding” with these systems. Products in
this category include All-Bond
®
2 (Bisco), OptiBond
®
FL
(Kerr), and Adper™ Scotchbond™ Multipurpose (3M
ESPE). These bonding agent systems have the longest track
record as far as research goes and they perform well clinical
-
ly. In fact, OptiBond FL, an 18-year-old product, received
the Product of the Year award from
Reality
magazine.
Bond
strengths for these adhesives were in the low- to mid-20MPa
range and significantly reduced margin leakage compared to
earlier systems.
This system was very technique sensitive
and required an exacting technique of controlled etching
with acid on enamel and dentin, followed by two or more
components on both enamel and dentin. Because of the
complexity of multiple bottles and steps, dentists began
requesting a simplified adhesive system.
Date: 2015-02-03; view: 1707
|