The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2019 ) > List of Articles


Influence of the Restorative Strategy on Push-out Bond Strength of the Self-adhesive Composite

Uêdja N Oliveira, Isabelle L de Oliveira, Oscar FF de Brito, Marleny EM de Martínez Gerbi, Márcia A Durão, Gabriela QM Monteiro

Keywords : Bond strength, Push-out force, Self-adhesive composite

Citation Information : Oliveira UN, de Oliveira IL, de Brito OF, de Martínez Gerbi ME, Durão MA, Monteiro GQ. Influence of the Restorative Strategy on Push-out Bond Strength of the Self-adhesive Composite. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (12):1384-1388.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2723

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2015

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Aim: This study evaluated the influence of the resin composite and bonding strategy on the push-out bond strength of the self-adhesive, Fusio liquid dentin (FUS) (Pentron Clinical), and of two conventional resin composites of different viscosities, Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE) and tetric flow (Ivoclar Vivadent). Materials and methods: Thirty-two bovine incisors were used after disinfection. The roots were sectioned and the buccal and lingual surfaces were polished until a 2-mm slab was achieved, maintaining enamel at the buccal surface and dentin at the lingual surface. Standardized cavities were then prepared (2.0 × 1.5 mm) and restored according to the following bonding strategies: Fusio liquid dentin with selective etching (FUSSE) in enamel, FUS, Filtek Z250, and tetric flow-total etching (TET). All groups were restored in bulk. After 24 hours of storage in distilled water, finishing and polishing were performed. The push-out test was conducted on a universal testing machine (0.05 mm/minute). Data were analyzed through Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests (p = 0.05). The extruded restorations were evaluated under a stereomicroscope (10×) for failure-mode evaluation. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups TET, Z250, and FUS, with 145.59, 108.91, and 104.12 MPa means, respectively. The FUSSE group (40.92 MPa) showed a statistically significant lower bond strength. The predominant failure mode was a mixed failure for all groups. Conclusion: The self-adhesive resin composite achieved a satisfactory result on bond strength when compared to conventional composites with regular and low viscosities, except when selective enamel etching was done. Clinical significance: This study shows that the clinicians must be aware of the viscosity of the phosphoric acid to avoid dentin contamination whenever performing selective enamel etching. And the self-adhesive resin composite studied presented as another restorative alternative.

  1. Campos AE, Ardu S, Lefever D, et al. Marginal adaptation of class II cavities restored with bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2014;42(5):575–581. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.007.
  2. Feng L, Suh BI, Shortall AC. Formation of gaps at the filler-resin interface induced by polymerization contraction stress: gaps at the interface. Dent Mater 2010;26(8):719–729. DOI: 10.1016/
  3. Ferracane JL. Resin composite-state of the art. Dent Mater 2011;27(1):29–38. DOI: 10.1016/
  4. Bertolo MVL, Moraes RCM, Pfeifer C, et al. Influence of photoinitiator system on physical-chemical properties of experimental self-adhesive composites. Braz Dent J 2017;28(1):35–39. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201700841.
  5. Fugolin APP, Pfeifer CS. New resins for dental composites. J Dent Res 2017;96(10):1085–1091. DOI: 10.1177/0022034517720658.
  6. Fu J, Kakuda S, Pan F, et al. Bonding performance of a newly developed step-less all-in-one system on dentin. Dent Mater J 2013;32(2): 203–211. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2012-204.
  7. Hanabusa M, Mine A, Kuboki T, et al. TEM interfacial characterization of an experimental self-adhesive filling material bonded to enamel/dentin. Dent Mater 2011;27(8):818–824. DOI: 10.1016/
  8. Yuan H, Li M, Guo B, et al. Evaluation of microtensile bond strength and microleakage of a self-adhering flowable composite. J Adhes Dent 2015;17(6):535–543. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a35253.
  9. Mine A, De Munck J, Van Ende A, et al. Limited interaction of a self-adhesive flowable composite with dentin/enamel characterized by TEM. Dent Mater 2017;33(2):209–217. DOI: 10.1016/
  10. Maas MS, Alania Y, Natale LC, et al. Trends in restorative composites research: what is in the future? Braz Oral Res 2017;31(1):23–36. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0055.
  11. Poitevin A, De Munck J, Van Ende A, et al. Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive composites to dentin and enamel. Dent Mater 2013;29(2):221–230. DOI: 10.1016/
  12. Rengo C, Goracci C, Juloski J, et al. Influence of phosphoric acid etching on microleakage of a self-etch adhesive and a self-adhering composite. Aust Dent J 2012;57(2):220–226. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2012.01689.x.
  13. Schuldt C, Birlbauer S, Pitchika V, et al. Shear bond strength and microleakage of a new self-etching/selfadhesive pit and fissure sealant. J Adhes Dent 2015;17(6):491–497. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a35255.
  14. ISO-Standards (2003) ISO 11405 Dental Materials-Testing of Adhesion to Tooth Structure Technical Specification.
  15. Celik EU, Aka B, Yilmaz F. Six-month clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive flowable composite in noncarious cervical lesions. J Adhes Dent 2015;17(4):361–368. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a34556.
  16. Goracci C, Margvelashvili M, Giovannetti A, et al. Shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets bonded with a new self-adhering flowable resin composite. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(2):609–617. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0729-x.
  17. İşman E, Karaarslan ES, Okşayan R, et al. Inadequate shear bond strengths of self-etch, self-adhesive systems for secure orthodontic bonding. Dent Mater J 2012;31(6):947–953. DOI: 10.4012/dmj. 2012-103.
  18. Eliades A, Birpou E, Eliades T, et al. Self-adhesive restoratives as pit and fissure sealants: a comparative laboratory study. Dent Mater 2013;29(7):752–762. DOI: 10.1016/
  19. Yazici AR, Agarwal I, Campillo-Funollet M, et al. Effect of laser preparation on bond strength of a self-adhesive flowable resin. Lasers Med Sci 2013;28(1):343–347. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-012-1158-4.
  20. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, et al. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 2004;20(10):963–971. DOI: 10.1016/
  21. Borges MG, Faria-e-Silva AL, Santos-Filho PCF, et al. Does the moment of fiber post cutting influence on the retention to root dentin? Braz Dent J 2015;26(2):141–145. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201300242.
  22. Vichi A, Margvelashvili M, Goracci C, et al. Bonding and sealing ability of a new self-adhering flowable composite resin in class I restorations. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(6):1497–1506. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0846-6.
  23. Goracci C, Cadenaro M, Fontanive L, et al. Polymerization efficiency and flexural strength of low-stress restorative composites. Dent Mater 2014;30(6):688–694. DOI: 10.1016/
  24. Tuloglu N, Sen Tunc E, Ozer S, et al. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite on dentin with and without application of an adhesive system. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014;12(2):97–101. DOI: 10.5301/jabfm.5000166.
  25. Makishi P, Pacheco RR, Sadr A, et al. Assessment of self-adhesive resin composites: nondestructive imaging of resin-dentin interfacial adaptation and shear bond strength. Microsc Microanal 2015;21(6):1523–1529. DOI: 10.1017/S1431927615015354.
  26. Sachdeva P, Goswami M, Singh D. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and nanoleakage of conventional and self-adhering flowable composites to primary teeth dentin. Contemp Clin Dent 2016;7(3):326–331. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.188549.
  27. Altunsoy M, Botsali MS, Sari T, et al. Effect of different surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength of two self-adhesive flowable composites. Lasers Med Sci 2015;30(6):1667–1673. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-014-1640-2.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.