Lyngjames9837

ise. It also demonstrates the study of the degradation pattern. Moreover, the above developed related substance analytical method was applied to the bulk analysis and pharmaceutical dosage form for routine analysis and stability study.

The present study investigated the influence of simulated intraoral conditions (increased temperature and humidity) on two different surface pretreatment methods to repair a lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic (LDS).

A total of 540 rectangular lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic bars were manufactured (3 x 7 x 9 mm; IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent). Further specimen preparation was performed in an incubator with controlled relative humidity (RH) and temperature to simulate three different environmental settings laboratory conditions (LC, n = 180, 23°C, 50% RH), rubber-dam conditions (RC, n = 180, 30°C, 50% RH) or oral conditions (OC, n = 180, 32°C, 95 ± 5% RH). One-third of the bars under each condition (n = 60) were grit blasted (GBL) with alumina (35 µm at 1 bar pressure for 10 s and a working distance of 4 ± 1 cm) and primed (60 s, Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent). Another third (n = 60) were pretreated with a self-etching glass-ceramic primer (MEP, Monobond Etch & Prime, Ivoclar Vivadent). One group wits should be performed using a rubber-dam, primarily when using GBL.

To evaluate the influence of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) solutions used as dentin pretreatments on microtensile bond strength (µTBS), as well as the dentin/restoration interface micromorphology of a universal adhesive in etch-and-rinse or self-etch mode.

Eighty blocks of dentin were submitted to acid conditioning with 35% phosphoric acid (etch-and-rinse), or not (self-etch), and distributed among the treatments (n = 10) CON Scotchbond Universal/3M Oral Care; DMSO pretreatment with DMSO; DMSO/water pretreatment with DMSO in water (11); DMSO/ethanol pretreatment with DMSO in ethanol (11). Microtensile bond strength and failure tests were performed after 24-h and 6-month storage. see more The tooth-restoration interface was evaluated using scanning electron microscopy to assess the hybrid layer formed.

The interaction between treatments, storage time, and etching modes was not significant for µTBS (p = 0.2469). The DMSO, DMSO/water and DMSO/ethanol pretreatments did not affect µTBS values at either time point (p = 0.8732). Aging decreased µTBS over time only for the etch-and-rinse strategy, although the groups presented higher microtensile bond strengths in etch-and-rinse mode than in self-etch mode at both time points (p < 0.0001). The micromorphological images of the interface showed that different DMSO pretreatment solutions did not impair hybrid layer formation.

The use of dentin pretreatments containing DMSO did not improve the bonding or the micromorphology of a universal adhesive in etch-and-rinse or self-etch modes.

The use of dentin pretreatments containing DMSO did not improve the bonding or the micromorphology of a universal adhesive in etch-and-rinse or self-etch modes.

To experimentally assess the effect of regenerative heat treatment (HT) on yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline ceramic (Y-TZP) to guarantee veneer adhesion strength.

One surface of bar-shaped Y-TZP specimens was ground (G) with a diamond stone, while the control samples (C) were not. Groups C900 and G900 were submitted to HT at 900°C for 60 min, whereas groups C1000 and G1000 were submitted to HT at 1000°C for 30 min. The treated surfaces were characterized by x-ray diffractometry (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and optical and mechanical profilometry. The energy release rate through interface fracture was determined by a four-point bending test on notched Y-TZP veneered specimens. XRD was refined by the Rietveld method, mean roughness (Ra) and energy release rate were submitted to two-way ANOVA (a = 0.05), and the images were analyzed descriptively.

The monoclinic phase (vol%), means of Ra (µm), and the energy release rate (J/m2) were, respectively C = 1.2/0.17/6.8, C900 = 0.0/0.18/6.6, C1000 = 0.0/0.18/7.6, G = 2.6/1.16/8.3, G900 = 0.0/1.07/8.0, and G1000 = 0.0/1.01/5.7. The surface fraction of monoclinic zirconia increased by grinding and decreased by HT. Ra also increased after grinding (p < 0.005) but remained unaltered after HT (p = 0.22). Increased irregularity was observed in the G groups and a subtle smoothing of the surface after HT. After the fracture of the bilayers, a residual amount of porcelain could be seen on the zirconia surface in all groups. The energy release rate was statistically equal among all groups (p > 0.05).

Heat treatment after grinding completely restored the tetragonal phase of zirconia without altering the energy release rate during interfacial fracture.

Heat treatment after grinding completely restored the tetragonal phase of zirconia without altering the energy release rate during interfacial fracture.

To evaluate through a systematic review and meta-analysis the bonding performance of adhesive materials to silver diamine fluoride (SDF)-treated dentin.

Studies located in PubMed, Web of Science, LILACS, and Scopus up to September 2020, which compared the bond strength of adhesives (AD) or glass-ionomer cement (GIC) to SDF-treated and untreated (control) dentin were included. Mean differences were estimated separately by material and dentin condition (sound or caries-affected), with a random-effects model, at a 5% significance level.

Twenty-two studies, including 11 new studies not included in our previous systematic review, met the eligibility criteria, and 21 studies were considered in the meta-analyses. SDF dentin pretreatment did not influence the bonding of GIC (Z = 0.53; p = 0.60), independent of dentin condition. SDF treatment significantly impaired the bonding of AD (Z = 2.43; p = 0.01). A rinsing step after SDF eliminated this effect in sound dentin (Z = 1.82; p = 0.07) and increased the bond strength to caries-affected dentin (Z = 2.14; p = 0.03).

SDF pretreatment does not influence the bond strength of GIC. A rinsing step after SDF application can improve the bond strength of AD to caries-affected dentin.

SDF pretreatment does not influence the bond strength of GIC. A rinsing step after SDF application can improve the bond strength of AD to caries-affected dentin.

This study investigated the ability of two chewing simulation devices to emulate in vitro the clinical deterioration observed in anterior composite restorations in severe tooth-wear patients.

Advanced tooth wear was simulated in bovine incisors, which were restored with palatal and buccal direct composite veneer restorations. The incisal edges of restorations were subjected to 960K cycles of either compressive loading (Biocycle-V2; 125 N at 2 Hz) or wear and mechanical loading (Rub and Roll; 30 N at 20 rpm). Surface degradation was rated using FDI scores to compare the chewing devices (Fisher's test, a = 0.05). Topography and deterioration of restorations was analyzed using SEM. The ability to emulate the deterioration was investigated by comparing the surface degradation observed in vitro with the clinical degradation observed in restorations placed in severe tooth-wear patients after 3.5 years.

Distinct degradation patterns were observed between the simulation devices Biocycle-V2 generated deterioration that was not comparable to the clinical situation, including contact damage, minor wear, and localized roughening. The degradation caused by Rub and Roll was more similar to the in vivo situation, including wear facets, chipping, delamination, staining, and marginal ditching. The FDI scores were different between the chewing devices for surface/marginal staining, material/retention, and marginal adaptation (p = 0.003). SEM analysis showed microcracking at the interface between composite layers at the incisal edges.

The Rub and Roll chewing device was able to emulate the clinical deterioration observed in anterior restorations in severe tooth-wear patients and thus may be used as an oral-cavity simulation method, contributing to translational research.

The Rub and Roll chewing device was able to emulate the clinical deterioration observed in anterior restorations in severe tooth-wear patients and thus may be used as an oral-cavity simulation method, contributing to translational research.

To compare the effect of active pre-conditioning with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) vs 37% phosphoric acid (PA) on the resin-enamel microshear bond strength (µSBS), enamel-etching pattern, and in situ degree of conversion (in situ DC) of four universal adhesives on sound and fluorotic enamel.

In this study, 448 extracted human molars (224 without fluorosis and 224 with fluorosis) were sectioned into four parts and divided into 16 experimental groups based on the enamel surface (sound or fluorotic enamel), adhesive (Clearfil Universal Bond [CUB], Futurabond U [FBU], iBond Universal [IBU], or Scotchbond Universal [SBU]), and enamel conditioning agent (PA or EDTA). The specimens were stored for 24 h and tested under shear stress at 1.0 mm/min to determine the µSBS. The adhesive-enamel interfaces were evaluated for in situ DC using micro-Raman spectroscopy. The enamel-etching pattern was evaluated using a scanning electron microscope. The µSBS and in situ DC data were analyzed separately using three-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test (a = 0.05).

Sound enamel showed higher µSBS and in situ DC compared to fluorotic enamel (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed for µSBS, in situ DC (p > 0.05), or etching patterns when PA and EDTA etching were compared in sound and fluorotic enamel. Moreover, CUB and SBU showed higher mean µSBS than did FBU and IBU in both sound and fluorotic enamel (p < 0.05).

Compared to PA, active pre-conditioning with EDTA showed similar µSBS and enamel etching patterns for all the adhesives in fluorotic enamel, without compromising the in situ DC.

Compared to PA, active pre-conditioning with EDTA showed similar µSBS and enamel etching patterns for all the adhesives in fluorotic enamel, without compromising the in situ DC.

To evaluate the effects of C-factor on the bond strength of universal adhesives to floor and wall dentin in class-I composite restorations using a bulk-fill composite.

108 non-carious humans third molars were randomly divided into four groups as follows flat wall, flat floor, cavity wall, and cavity floor (n = 36). Then, each group was subdivided into three subgroups according to the type of adhesive used Single Bond Universal, G-premio Bond (both universal adhesives), or Adper Single Bond 2 (an etch-and-rinse adhesive). After the bonding procedure, X-tra fill resin composite was applied in bulk to build up the flat surfaces or fill the cavities.Then the teeth were sectioned into 1-mm2 sticks and microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was measured using a universal testing machine. µTBS (MPa) was analyzed by one-way, two-way, and three-way ANOVA using SPSS Version 23 (a = 0.05).

Interactions between adhesives and bonding surfaces, as well as C-factor and bonding surfaces showed statistically significant differences, but the interaction between the C-factor and type of adhesive was not statistically significant. The comparison of bonded surfaces including the flat wall and the flat floor in Adper Single Bond 2 was statistically significant (p < 0.05), except for the cavity wall and cavity floor.

Regardless of the type of adhesives, the C-factor reduced the µTBS of the composite resin to dentin. Adper Single Bond 2 mediated higher µTBS than did the universal adhesives G-premio Bond and Single Bond Universal.

Regardless of the type of adhesives, the C-factor reduced the µTBS of the composite resin to dentin. Adper Single Bond 2 mediated higher µTBS than did the universal adhesives G-premio Bond and Single Bond Universal.