Open AccessBond strength of self-adhesive flowable resin composites to tooth structure
Author(s) -
Cristhian Camilo Madrid Troconis,
Samantha Molina Pérez
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
brazilian journal of oral sciences/brazilian journal of oral sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.125
H-Index - 11
eISSN - 1677-3225
pISSN - 1677-3217
DOI - 10.20396/bjos.v20i00.8663641
Subject(s) - bond strength , dentin , enamel paint , materials science , adhesive , dentistry , composite material , phosphoric acid , dental bonding , acid etching , orthodontics , medicine , layer (electronics) , metallurgy
Aim: To review the current literature regarding the bond strength of self-adhesive flowable resin composites (SAFRCs) to tooth structure, comparing the outcomes with conventional flowable resin composites (CFRCs). Methods: PubMed/Medline, EbscoHost and Scopus databases were screened (last update on November 2020) using related Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free terms. We included in vitro studies published in English language comparing the bond strength of SAFRCs and CFRCs to enamel and/or dentin from primary and/or permanent teeth. Results: In total, 23 articles were included. Unlike CFRCs, SAFRCs such as Vertise® Flow and Fusio™ Liquid Dentin exhibited statistically lower bond strength to enamel and dentin from permanent teeth. There were limited studies comparing the enamel bond strength of CFRCs and SAFRCs (prior phosphoric acid etching and/or adhesive system use). Also, we found few studies that evaluated the bonding effectiveness of Constic® and other SAFRCs to primary teeth. Conclusions: Current SAFRCs showed low bond strength to permanent teeth, which impedes to recommend them as a reliable alternative to CFRCs. The bonding performance of Constic® on both hard dental tissues should be evaluated on future studies. Also, more evidence assessing the bond strength of SAFRCs to primary teeth and etched enamel is needed.