J Oral Sci. 2023;65(1):53-56. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0268.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the reaction products formed by application of three tooth etchants to hydroxyapatite.

METHODS: Tooth etchants with three different compositions, designed for application to teeth before dental adhesive – ” K-etchant GEL” (containing phosphoric acid), “Enamel Conditioner” (containing organic acids), and “Multi Etchant” (containing acidic monomer) – were applied to hydroxyapatite plates.

RESULTS: Atomic force microscopy measurements revealed that Multi Etchant formed nano-sized particles on the hydroxyapatite. X-ray diffraction and Fourier transform infrared spectrometer analyses of the powdered hydroxyapatite indicated that Enamel Conditioner produced calcium tartrate whereas K-etchant GEL generated monetite. These results indicated that each etchant reacted with hydroxyapatite in a different way.

CONCLUSION: Not only differences among the etching ability of etchants, but also differences in the reaction compounds they produce may influence bonding performance in clinical practice.

PMID:36631127 | DOI:10.2334/josnusd.22-0268

J Oral Sci. 2023;65(1):53-56. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0268.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the reaction products formed by application of three tooth etchants to hydroxyapatite.

METHODS: Tooth etchants with three different compositions, designed for application to teeth before dental adhesive – ” K-etchant GEL” (containing phosphoric acid), “Enamel Conditioner” (containing organic acids), and “Multi Etchant” (containing acidic monomer) – were applied to hydroxyapatite plates.

RESULTS: Atomic force microscopy measurements revealed that Multi Etchant formed nano-sized particles on the hydroxyapatite. X-ray diffraction and Fourier transform infrared spectrometer analyses of the powdered hydroxyapatite indicated that Enamel Conditioner produced calcium tartrate whereas K-etchant GEL generated monetite. These results indicated that each etchant reacted with hydroxyapatite in a different way.

CONCLUSION: Not only differences among the etching ability of etchants, but also differences in the reaction compounds they produce may influence bonding performance in clinical practice.

PMID:36631127 | DOI:10.2334/josnusd.22-0268

J Oral Sci. 2023;65(1):53-56. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0268.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the reaction products formed by application of three tooth etchants to hydroxyapatite.

METHODS: Tooth etchants with three different compositions, designed for application to teeth before dental adhesive – ” K-etchant GEL” (containing phosphoric acid), “Enamel Conditioner” (containing organic acids), and “Multi Etchant” (containing acidic monomer) – were applied to hydroxyapatite plates.

RESULTS: Atomic force microscopy measurements revealed that Multi Etchant formed nano-sized particles on the hydroxyapatite. X-ray diffraction and Fourier transform infrared spectrometer analyses of the powdered hydroxyapatite indicated that Enamel Conditioner produced calcium tartrate whereas K-etchant GEL generated monetite. These results indicated that each etchant reacted with hydroxyapatite in a different way.

CONCLUSION: Not only differences among the etching ability of etchants, but also differences in the reaction compounds they produce may influence bonding performance in clinical practice.

PMID:36631127 | DOI:10.2334/josnusd.22-0268

J Oral Sci. 2023;65(1):53-56. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0268.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the reaction products formed by application of three tooth etchants to hydroxyapatite.

METHODS: Tooth etchants with three different compositions, designed for application to teeth before dental adhesive – ” K-etchant GEL” (containing phosphoric acid), “Enamel Conditioner” (containing organic acids), and “Multi Etchant” (containing acidic monomer) – were applied to hydroxyapatite plates.

RESULTS: Atomic force microscopy measurements revealed that Multi Etchant formed nano-sized particles on the hydroxyapatite. X-ray diffraction and Fourier transform infrared spectrometer analyses of the powdered hydroxyapatite indicated that Enamel Conditioner produced calcium tartrate whereas K-etchant GEL generated monetite. These results indicated that each etchant reacted with hydroxyapatite in a different way.

CONCLUSION: Not only differences among the etching ability of etchants, but also differences in the reaction compounds they produce may influence bonding performance in clinical practice.

PMID:36631127 | DOI:10.2334/josnusd.22-0268

Materials (Basel). 2022 Nov 21;15(22):8255. doi: 10.3390/ma15228255.

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to evaluate the influence of the manipulation surfaces on the physical properties of one-step self-etch adhesives (1-SEAs). Scotchbond Universal (SBU), Clearfil Universal Bond Quick ER (UBQ), and an experimental adhesive (UBQ_exp) were manipulated on different surfaces: manufacturer’s Teflon-based dispensing dish (TD) or hydroxyapatite plate (HA). After manipulation of the adhesives, the pH of each 1-SEA was measured. Samples of each adhesive/manipulation surface were prepared and subjected to water sorption (WS)/solubility (SL) and flexural strength tests. The modulus of elasticity (E) was measured in dry and wet conditions before and after 24 h water storage, and the percentage of variation of E (ΔE) was calculated. Results were analyzed using the t-test with Bonferroni corrections (α = 0.05). When adhesives were manipulated on the HA plate, there was a significant increase in the adhesives’ pH. WS and SL of all 1-SEAs decreased when the HA was used. Only SBU showed higher flexural strength when manipulated on the HA compared to the manipulation on TD under dry and wet conditions. For each 1-SEA, the use of HA resulted in significantly higher E in dry and wet conditions. ΔE of all adhesives was smaller with the manipulation on HA than on TD. It was concluded that the manipulation of 1-SEA on a hydroxyapatite plate considerably affected the adhesives’ properties.

PMID:36431740 | DOI:10.3390/ma15228255

Materials (Basel). 2022 Nov 21;15(22):8255. doi: 10.3390/ma15228255.

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to evaluate the influence of the manipulation surfaces on the physical properties of one-step self-etch adhesives (1-SEAs). Scotchbond Universal (SBU), Clearfil Universal Bond Quick ER (UBQ), and an experimental adhesive (UBQ_exp) were manipulated on different surfaces: manufacturer’s Teflon-based dispensing dish (TD) or hydroxyapatite plate (HA). After manipulation of the adhesives, the pH of each 1-SEA was measured. Samples of each adhesive/manipulation surface were prepared and subjected to water sorption (WS)/solubility (SL) and flexural strength tests. The modulus of elasticity (E) was measured in dry and wet conditions before and after 24 h water storage, and the percentage of variation of E (ΔE) was calculated. Results were analyzed using the t-test with Bonferroni corrections (α = 0.05). When adhesives were manipulated on the HA plate, there was a significant increase in the adhesives’ pH. WS and SL of all 1-SEAs decreased when the HA was used. Only SBU showed higher flexural strength when manipulated on the HA compared to the manipulation on TD under dry and wet conditions. For each 1-SEA, the use of HA resulted in significantly higher E in dry and wet conditions. ΔE of all adhesives was smaller with the manipulation on HA than on TD. It was concluded that the manipulation of 1-SEA on a hydroxyapatite plate considerably affected the adhesives’ properties.

PMID:36431740 | DOI:10.3390/ma15228255

Materials (Basel). 2022 Nov 21;15(22):8255. doi: 10.3390/ma15228255.

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to evaluate the influence of the manipulation surfaces on the physical properties of one-step self-etch adhesives (1-SEAs). Scotchbond Universal (SBU), Clearfil Universal Bond Quick ER (UBQ), and an experimental adhesive (UBQ_exp) were manipulated on different surfaces: manufacturer’s Teflon-based dispensing dish (TD) or hydroxyapatite plate (HA). After manipulation of the adhesives, the pH of each 1-SEA was measured. Samples of each adhesive/manipulation surface were prepared and subjected to water sorption (WS)/solubility (SL) and flexural strength tests. The modulus of elasticity (E) was measured in dry and wet conditions before and after 24 h water storage, and the percentage of variation of E (ΔE) was calculated. Results were analyzed using the t-test with Bonferroni corrections (α = 0.05). When adhesives were manipulated on the HA plate, there was a significant increase in the adhesives’ pH. WS and SL of all 1-SEAs decreased when the HA was used. Only SBU showed higher flexural strength when manipulated on the HA compared to the manipulation on TD under dry and wet conditions. For each 1-SEA, the use of HA resulted in significantly higher E in dry and wet conditions. ΔE of all adhesives was smaller with the manipulation on HA than on TD. It was concluded that the manipulation of 1-SEA on a hydroxyapatite plate considerably affected the adhesives’ properties.

PMID:36431740 | DOI:10.3390/ma15228255