Journal of

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

---

Introduction: Different light sources influence restoration bond strength. Therefore the purpose of this study was evaluation of the microtensile bond strength of two types of sixth generation adhesives in different light sources. Methods: some sound human molars were collected. 10 sample in each group was prepared that totally 60 samples were investigated. In each tooth some dentinal specimen was prepared in buccal surface using diamond bur after abrading the enamel. Composite resin (Z250) was inserted in form of a layer using a Clearfil SE bond and Adper prompt L-POP adhesives. Both adhesives were polymerized using different light curing units including QTH at 600mW/cm2, LED at 400mW/cm2, PAC at1200mW/cm2, G1-Adper /LED, G2-Adper /Plasma, G3-Adper /QTH, G4-SE/LED, G5-SE /Plasma, G6-SE /QTH. The restorations were sectioned with 1mm thickness per teeth. All specimens were then subjected to microtensile testing machines. Then, data were analyzed using SPSS software, ANOVA and T-test. Results: Clearfil SE /Plasma arc group had the highest bond strength. The bond strength of Adper prompt L-POP significantly varied in different light sources (p<0.05). Significant difference was observed between Adper and SE (p<0.05) while using LED. Conclusion: This study showed that various light sources have different influence on bond strength.

Keywords: Bonding; Light-Curing Unit; Microtensile Bond Strength

Full-Text [PDF 376 kb]   (1963 Downloads)    

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

---