Limits...
Effects of solvent evaporation on water sorption/solubility and nanoleakage of adhesive systems.

Chimeli TB, D'Alpino PH, Pereira PN, Hilgert LA, Di Hipólito V, Garcia FC - J Appl Oral Sci (2014 Jul-Aug)

Bottom Line: Statistical analysis revealed that only the factor "adhesive" was significant (p<0.05).CSE (control) presented significantly lower net uptake (5.4%).Although the evaporation has no effect in the kinetics of water diffusion, the nanoleakage expression of the adhesives tested increases when the solvents are not evaporated.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Brasilia, Brasília, DF, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate the influence of solvent evaporation in the kinetics of water diffusion (water sorption-WS, solubility-SL, and net water uptake) and nanoleakage of adhesive systems.

Material and methods: Disk-shaped specimens (5.0 mm in diameter x 0.8 mm in thickness) were produced (N=48) using the adhesives: Clearfil S3 Bond (CS3)/Kuraray, Clearfil SE Bond - control group (CSE)/Kuraray, Optibond Solo Plus (OS)/Kerr and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SBU)/3M ESPE. The solvents were either evaporated for 30 s or not evaporated (N=24/per group), and then photoactivated for 80 s (550 mW/cm2). After desiccation, the specimens were weighed and stored in distilled water (N=12) or mineral oil (N=12) to evaluate the water diffusion over a 7-day period. Net water uptake (%) was also calculated as the sum of WS and SL. Data were submitted to 3-way ANOVA/Tukey's test (α=5%). The nanoleakage expression in three additional specimens per group was also evaluated after ammoniacal silver impregnation after 7 days of water storage under SEM.

Results: Statistical analysis revealed that only the factor "adhesive" was significant (p<0.05). Solvent evaporation had no influence in the WS and SL of the adhesives. CSE (control) presented significantly lower net uptake (5.4%). The nanoleakage was enhanced by the presence of solvent in the adhesives.

Conclusions: Although the evaporation has no effect in the kinetics of water diffusion, the nanoleakage expression of the adhesives tested increases when the solvents are not evaporated.

Show MeSH
Nanoleakage of Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) after 7 days of water storage
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126825&req=5

f04: Nanoleakage of Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) after 7 days of water storage

Mentions: The nanoleakage patterns of the adhesives investigated are illustrated in Figures 3 and 4. Representative SEM micrographs of the adhesives after 7 days of storagein water are presented in Figure 3. Thesolvated adhesives showed similar nanoleakage patterns (moderate silver uptake - TypeI) after evaporation, whereas a more intense nanoleakage was noted for thenon-evaporated ones (severe silver uptake - Type II) (Figure 3). The non-solvated adhesive CSE presented a nanoleakage pattern(Type I) similar to that observed for the solvated adhesives when the solvents wereevaporated (Figure 4). The adhesive SBU showedhigher silver uptake when the evaporation was not performed in comparison with thatobserved for both OP and CS3.


Effects of solvent evaporation on water sorption/solubility and nanoleakage of adhesive systems.

Chimeli TB, D'Alpino PH, Pereira PN, Hilgert LA, Di Hipólito V, Garcia FC - J Appl Oral Sci (2014 Jul-Aug)

Nanoleakage of Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) after 7 days of water storage
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126825&req=5

f04: Nanoleakage of Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) after 7 days of water storage
Mentions: The nanoleakage patterns of the adhesives investigated are illustrated in Figures 3 and 4. Representative SEM micrographs of the adhesives after 7 days of storagein water are presented in Figure 3. Thesolvated adhesives showed similar nanoleakage patterns (moderate silver uptake - TypeI) after evaporation, whereas a more intense nanoleakage was noted for thenon-evaporated ones (severe silver uptake - Type II) (Figure 3). The non-solvated adhesive CSE presented a nanoleakage pattern(Type I) similar to that observed for the solvated adhesives when the solvents wereevaporated (Figure 4). The adhesive SBU showedhigher silver uptake when the evaporation was not performed in comparison with thatobserved for both OP and CS3.

Bottom Line: Statistical analysis revealed that only the factor "adhesive" was significant (p<0.05).CSE (control) presented significantly lower net uptake (5.4%).Although the evaporation has no effect in the kinetics of water diffusion, the nanoleakage expression of the adhesives tested increases when the solvents are not evaporated.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Brasilia, Brasília, DF, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate the influence of solvent evaporation in the kinetics of water diffusion (water sorption-WS, solubility-SL, and net water uptake) and nanoleakage of adhesive systems.

Material and methods: Disk-shaped specimens (5.0 mm in diameter x 0.8 mm in thickness) were produced (N=48) using the adhesives: Clearfil S3 Bond (CS3)/Kuraray, Clearfil SE Bond - control group (CSE)/Kuraray, Optibond Solo Plus (OS)/Kerr and Scotchbond Universal Adhesive (SBU)/3M ESPE. The solvents were either evaporated for 30 s or not evaporated (N=24/per group), and then photoactivated for 80 s (550 mW/cm2). After desiccation, the specimens were weighed and stored in distilled water (N=12) or mineral oil (N=12) to evaluate the water diffusion over a 7-day period. Net water uptake (%) was also calculated as the sum of WS and SL. Data were submitted to 3-way ANOVA/Tukey's test (α=5%). The nanoleakage expression in three additional specimens per group was also evaluated after ammoniacal silver impregnation after 7 days of water storage under SEM.

Results: Statistical analysis revealed that only the factor "adhesive" was significant (p<0.05). Solvent evaporation had no influence in the WS and SL of the adhesives. CSE (control) presented significantly lower net uptake (5.4%). The nanoleakage was enhanced by the presence of solvent in the adhesives.

Conclusions: Although the evaporation has no effect in the kinetics of water diffusion, the nanoleakage expression of the adhesives tested increases when the solvents are not evaporated.

Show MeSH