Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations

Ricardo M. Carvalho, Adriana P. Manso, Saulo Geraldeli, Franklin Chi Meng Tay, David Henry Pashley

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

107 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Resin-dentin bond strength durability testing has been extensively used to evaluate the effectiveness of adhesive systems and the applicability of new strategies to improve that property. Clinical effectiveness is determined by the survival rates of restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). While there is evidence that the bond strength data generated in laboratory studies somehow correlates with the clinical outcome of NCCL restorations, it is questionable whether the knowledge of bonding mechanisms obtained from laboratory testing can be used to justify clinical performance of resin-dentin bonds. There are significant morphological and structural differences between the bonding substrate used in in vitro testing versus the substrate encountered in NCCL. These differences qualify NCCL as a hostile substrate for bonding, yielding bond strengths that are usually lower than those obtained in normal dentin. However, clinical survival time of NCCL restorations often surpass the durability of normal dentin tested in the laboratory. Likewise, clinical reports on the long-term survival rates of posterior composite restorations defy the relatively rapid rate of degradation of adhesive interfaces reported in laboratory studies. This article critically analyzes how the effectiveness of adhesive systems is currently measured, to identify gaps in knowledge where new research could be encouraged. The morphological and chemical analysis of bonded interfaces of resin composite restorations in teeth that had been in clinical service for many years, but were extracted for periodontal reasons, could be a useful tool to observe the ultrastructural characteristics of restorations that are regarded as clinically acceptable. This could help determine how much degradation is acceptable for clinical success.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)72-86
Number of pages15
JournalDental Materials
Volume28
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2012

Fingerprint

Dentin
Adhesives
Restoration
Durability
Resins
Composite Resins
Testing
Substrates
Degradation
Tooth
Bond strength (materials)
Composite materials
Research
Chemical analysis

Keywords

  • Adhesives
  • Clinical outcome
  • Dentin
  • Durability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Materials Science(all)
  • Dentistry(all)
  • Mechanics of Materials

Cite this

Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations. / Carvalho, Ricardo M.; Manso, Adriana P.; Geraldeli, Saulo; Tay, Franklin Chi Meng; Pashley, David Henry.

In: Dental Materials, Vol. 28, No. 1, 01.01.2012, p. 72-86.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Carvalho, RM, Manso, AP, Geraldeli, S, Tay, FCM & Pashley, DH 2012, 'Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations', Dental Materials, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 72-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.011
Carvalho, Ricardo M. ; Manso, Adriana P. ; Geraldeli, Saulo ; Tay, Franklin Chi Meng ; Pashley, David Henry. / Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations. In: Dental Materials. 2012 ; Vol. 28, No. 1. pp. 72-86.
@article{59f26164b14240d0876a1ccf2891a6ac,
title = "Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations",
abstract = "Resin-dentin bond strength durability testing has been extensively used to evaluate the effectiveness of adhesive systems and the applicability of new strategies to improve that property. Clinical effectiveness is determined by the survival rates of restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). While there is evidence that the bond strength data generated in laboratory studies somehow correlates with the clinical outcome of NCCL restorations, it is questionable whether the knowledge of bonding mechanisms obtained from laboratory testing can be used to justify clinical performance of resin-dentin bonds. There are significant morphological and structural differences between the bonding substrate used in in vitro testing versus the substrate encountered in NCCL. These differences qualify NCCL as a hostile substrate for bonding, yielding bond strengths that are usually lower than those obtained in normal dentin. However, clinical survival time of NCCL restorations often surpass the durability of normal dentin tested in the laboratory. Likewise, clinical reports on the long-term survival rates of posterior composite restorations defy the relatively rapid rate of degradation of adhesive interfaces reported in laboratory studies. This article critically analyzes how the effectiveness of adhesive systems is currently measured, to identify gaps in knowledge where new research could be encouraged. The morphological and chemical analysis of bonded interfaces of resin composite restorations in teeth that had been in clinical service for many years, but were extracted for periodontal reasons, could be a useful tool to observe the ultrastructural characteristics of restorations that are regarded as clinically acceptable. This could help determine how much degradation is acceptable for clinical success.",
keywords = "Adhesives, Clinical outcome, Dentin, Durability",
author = "Carvalho, {Ricardo M.} and Manso, {Adriana P.} and Saulo Geraldeli and Tay, {Franklin Chi Meng} and Pashley, {David Henry}",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "72--86",
journal = "Dental Materials",
issn = "0109-5641",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations

AU - Carvalho, Ricardo M.

AU - Manso, Adriana P.

AU - Geraldeli, Saulo

AU - Tay, Franklin Chi Meng

AU - Pashley, David Henry

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Resin-dentin bond strength durability testing has been extensively used to evaluate the effectiveness of adhesive systems and the applicability of new strategies to improve that property. Clinical effectiveness is determined by the survival rates of restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). While there is evidence that the bond strength data generated in laboratory studies somehow correlates with the clinical outcome of NCCL restorations, it is questionable whether the knowledge of bonding mechanisms obtained from laboratory testing can be used to justify clinical performance of resin-dentin bonds. There are significant morphological and structural differences between the bonding substrate used in in vitro testing versus the substrate encountered in NCCL. These differences qualify NCCL as a hostile substrate for bonding, yielding bond strengths that are usually lower than those obtained in normal dentin. However, clinical survival time of NCCL restorations often surpass the durability of normal dentin tested in the laboratory. Likewise, clinical reports on the long-term survival rates of posterior composite restorations defy the relatively rapid rate of degradation of adhesive interfaces reported in laboratory studies. This article critically analyzes how the effectiveness of adhesive systems is currently measured, to identify gaps in knowledge where new research could be encouraged. The morphological and chemical analysis of bonded interfaces of resin composite restorations in teeth that had been in clinical service for many years, but were extracted for periodontal reasons, could be a useful tool to observe the ultrastructural characteristics of restorations that are regarded as clinically acceptable. This could help determine how much degradation is acceptable for clinical success.

AB - Resin-dentin bond strength durability testing has been extensively used to evaluate the effectiveness of adhesive systems and the applicability of new strategies to improve that property. Clinical effectiveness is determined by the survival rates of restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL). While there is evidence that the bond strength data generated in laboratory studies somehow correlates with the clinical outcome of NCCL restorations, it is questionable whether the knowledge of bonding mechanisms obtained from laboratory testing can be used to justify clinical performance of resin-dentin bonds. There are significant morphological and structural differences between the bonding substrate used in in vitro testing versus the substrate encountered in NCCL. These differences qualify NCCL as a hostile substrate for bonding, yielding bond strengths that are usually lower than those obtained in normal dentin. However, clinical survival time of NCCL restorations often surpass the durability of normal dentin tested in the laboratory. Likewise, clinical reports on the long-term survival rates of posterior composite restorations defy the relatively rapid rate of degradation of adhesive interfaces reported in laboratory studies. This article critically analyzes how the effectiveness of adhesive systems is currently measured, to identify gaps in knowledge where new research could be encouraged. The morphological and chemical analysis of bonded interfaces of resin composite restorations in teeth that had been in clinical service for many years, but were extracted for periodontal reasons, could be a useful tool to observe the ultrastructural characteristics of restorations that are regarded as clinically acceptable. This could help determine how much degradation is acceptable for clinical success.

KW - Adhesives

KW - Clinical outcome

KW - Dentin

KW - Durability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84255177066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84255177066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.011

DO - 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.011

M3 - Review article

VL - 28

SP - 72

EP - 86

JO - Dental Materials

JF - Dental Materials

SN - 0109-5641

IS - 1

ER -