Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro bond strength of adhesive and traditional composites to several materials that might be encountered in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An adhesive composite, an adhesive composite with a bonding agent, and a traditional composite with a bonding agent were bonded to enamel, dentin, amalgam, porcelain, and nickel-chromium-beryllium (Ni-Cr-Be) alloy. Tensile bond strengths were determined after 24 hours storage at 23 degrees C or thermocycling. RESULTS: The use of an adhesive composite with a bonding agent resulted in increased bond strength to amalgam, porcelain, and dentin, but not to enamel or Ni-Cr-Be alloy at 23 degrees C, when compared with the adhesive composite alone. The adhesive composite with a bonding agent had higher bond strengths to amalgam, porcelain, and dentin than did the traditional composite with bonding agent, but not to enamel or Ni-Cr-Be alloy at 23 degrees C. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a bonding agent with an adhesive composite produced higher bond strengths than the adhesive composite alone. The traditional composite bonded better to enamel and Ni-Cr-Be alloy than did the adhesive composite. Thermocycling generally had no effect on bond strengths or increased them slightly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berry et al. (1994) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: