Article Data

  • Views 718
  • Dowloads 179

Original Research

Open Access

Shear Bond Strength of Different MDP-Containing Adhesive Systems on Enamel and Dentin from Primary Teeth

  • Min Jin Kim1
  • Joonhee Kim1
  • Ji-Soo Song1
  • Shin Hye Chung2
  • Hong-Keun Hyun1,*,

1Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

2Department of Dental Biomaterials Science Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

DOI: 10.17796/1053-4625-45.3.7 Vol.45,Issue 3,July 2021 pp.186-192

Published: 01 July 2021

*Corresponding Author(s): Hong-Keun Hyun E-mail:


Objective: To compare the shear bond strength (SBS) after thermocycling of four universal adhesives applied in self-etch mode on dentin and etch-and-rinse mode on enamel. Study design: Flat 144 buccal or lingual dentin and enamel surfaces from 72 non-carious primary molars were prepared. Samples were segregated into 12 groups (n=12): Adper Single Bond 2 etch-and-rinse (SB_T) and Clearfil SE Bond self-etch (SE_S) applied to enamel and dentin served as controls. Scotch Bond Universal Adhesive (SBU), Clearfil S3 Bond Universal Adhesive (SEU), Tetric N-Bond Universal Adhesive (TEN), and All Bond Universal (BIS) were applied in etch-and-rinse mode to enamel and in self-etch mode to dentin. They were thermocycled for 5000 cycles. SBS testing and the evaluation of fracture mode were performed. Results: SB_T showed statistically higher SBS than other adhesive groups using etch-and-rinse mode on enamel. SE_S and BIS had statistically higher SBS than other adhesive groups using self-etch mode on dentin. Mixed failure was the most common failure mode in each group. Conclusion: The universal adhesives did not show higher SBS than SB_T when using etch-and-rinse on enamel. All universal adhesives showed higher SBS than SB_T and had SBS similar to SE_S, except SBU when using self-etch mode on dentin.


Universal adhesive; Shear bond strength; Selective etching; Thermocycling, Primary Teeth

Cite and Share

Min Jin Kim,Joonhee Kim,Ji-Soo Song,Shin Hye Chung,Hong-Keun Hyun. Shear Bond Strength of Different MDP-Containing Adhesive Systems on Enamel and Dentin from Primary Teeth. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2021. 45(3);186-192.


1. Ozer F, Blatz MB. Self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems in clinical dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 34(1): 12-4, 6, 8; quiz 20, 30, 2013.

2. Thanaratikul B, Santiwong B, Harnirattisai C. Self-etch or etch-and-rinse mode did not affect the microshear bond strength of a universal adhesive to primary dentin. Dent Mater J 35(2): 174-9, 2016.

3. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 34(6): 849-53, 1955.

4. Agostini FG, Kaaden C, Powers JM. Bond strength of self-etching primers to enamel and dentin of primary teeth. Pediatr Dent 23(6): 481-6, 2001.

5. Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Roggendorf MJ, Naumann M, Taschner M. Selective enamel etching reconsidered: better than etch-and-rinse and self-etch? J Adhes Dent 10(5): 339-44, 2008.

6. Shimada Y, Senawongse P, Harnirattisai C, Burrow MF, Nakaoki Y, Tagami J. Bond strength of two adhesive systems to primary and permanent enamel. Oper Dent 27(4): 403-9, 2002.

7. Miranda C, Prates LH, Vieira Rde S, Calvo MC. Shear bond strength of different adhesive systems to primary dentin and enamel. J Clin Pediatr Dent 31(1): 35-40, 2006.

8. Senawongse P, Harnirattisai C, Shimada Y, Tagami J. Effective bond strength of current adhesive systems on deciduous and permanent dentin. Oper Dent 29(2): 196-202, 2004.

9. Torres CP, Ciccone JC, Ramos RP, Corona SA, Palma-Dibb RG, Borsatto MC. Tensile bond strength of self-etching adhesive systems to primary dentin. Am J Dent 18(6): 327-32, 2005.

10. Soares FZ, Rocha Rde O, Raggio DP, Sadek FT, Cardoso PE. Microtensile bond strength of different adhesive systems to primary and permanent dentin. Pediatr Dent 27(6): 457-62, 2005.

11. Helvey GA. Adhesive dentistry: the development of immediate dentin sealing/selective etching bonding technique. Compend Contin Educ Dent 32(9): 22, 4-32, 4-5; quiz 6, 8, 2011.

12. Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Eight-year clinical evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel etching. Dent Mater 26(12): 1176-84, 2010.

13. Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H, Inoue S, Tagawa Y, Suzuki K, De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 83(6): 454-8, 2004.

14. Inoue S, Koshiro K, Yoshida Y, De Munck J, Nagakane K, Suzuki K, Sano H, Van Meerbeek B. Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res 84(12): 1160-4, 2005.

15. Yoshida Y, Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N, Hayakawa S, Torii Y, Ogawa T, Osaka A, Meerbeek BV. Self-assembled Nano-layering at the Adhesive interface. J Dent Res 91(4): 376-81, 2012.

16. Munoz MA, Luque I, Hass V, Reis A, Loguercio AD, Bombarda NH. Immediate bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentine. J Dent 41(5): 404-11, 2013.

17. Perdigao J, Swift EJ, Jr. Universal Adhesives. J Esthet Restor Dent 27(6): 331-4, 2015.

18. Loguercio AD, de Paula EA, Hass V, Luque-Martinez I, Reis A, Perdigao J. A new universal simplified adhesive: 36-Month randomized double-blind clinical trial. J Dent 43(9): 1083-92, 2015.

19. Perdigao J, Geraldeli S. Bonding characteristics of self-etching adhesives to intact versus prepared enamel. J Esthet Restor Dent 15(1): 32-41; discussion 2, 2003.

20. Diniz AC, Bandeca MC, Pinheiro LM, Dos Santosh Almeida LJ, Jr., Torres CR, Borges AH, Pinto SC, Tonetto MR, De Jesus Tavarez RR, Firoozmand LM. Influence of Different Etching Modes on Bond Strength to Enamel using Universal Adhesive Systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 17(10): 820-5, 2016.

21. McLean DE, Meyers EJ, Guillory VL, Vandewalle KS. Enamel Bond Strength of New Universal Adhesive Bonding Agents. Oper Dent 40(4): 410-7, 2015.

22. Suda S, Tsujimoto A, Barkmeier WW, Nojiri K, Nagura Y, Takamizawa T, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Comparison of enamel bond fatigue durability between universal adhesives and two-step self-etch adhesives: Effect of phosphoric acid pre-etching. Dent Mater J 37(2): 244-55, 2018.

23. Chen C, Niu LN, Xie H, Zhang ZY, Zhou LQ, Jiao K, Chen JH, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Bonding of universal adhesives to dentine—Old wine in new bottles? J Dent 43(5): 525-36, 2015.

24. Munoz MA, Luque-Martinez I, Malaquias P, Hass V, Reis A, Campanha NH, Loguercio AD. In vitro longevity of bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentin. Oper Dent 40(3): 282 92, 2015.

25. Jang JH, Lee MG, Woo SU, Lee CO, Yi JK, Kim DS. Comparative study of the dentin bond strength of a new universal adhesive. Dent Mater J 35(4): 606-12, 2016.

26. Yoshida Y, Yoshihara K, Hayakawa S, Nagaoka N, Okihara T, Matsumoto T, Minagi S, Osaka A, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B. HEMA inhibits interfacial nano-layering of the functional monomer MDP. J Dent Res 91(11): 1060-5, 2012.

27. Chen L, Shen H, Suh BI. Effect of incorporating BisGMA resin on the bonding properties of silane and zirconia primers. J Prosthet Dent 110(5):402-7, 2013.

28. Casagrande L, de Hipolito V, de Goes MF, Barata JS, Garcia-Godoy F, de Araujo FB. Bond strength and failure patterns of adhesive restorations in primary teeth aged in the oral environment. Am J Dent 19(5): 279-82, 2006.

29. Marquezan M, Osorio R, Ciamponi AL, Toledano M. Resistance to degradation of bonded restorations to simulated caries-affected primary dentin. Am J Dent 23(1): 47-52, 2010.

30. Raffaini MS, Gomes-Silva JM, Torres-Mantovani CP, Palma-Dibb RG, Borsatto MC. Effect of blood contamination on the shear bond strength at resin/dentin interface in primary teeth. Am J Dent 21(3): 159-62, 2008.

31. Xie C, Han Y, Zhao XY, Wang ZY, He HM. Microtensile bond strength of one- and two-step self-etching adhesives on sclerotic dentin: the effects of thermocycling. Oper Dent 35(5): 547-55, 2010.

32. Hosoya Y, Kawashita Y, Yoshida M, Suefuji C, Marshall GW, Jr. Fluoridated light-activated bonding resin adhesion to enamel and dentin: primary vs. permanent. Pediatr Dent 22(2): 101-6, 2000.

33. Miyazaki M, Platt JA, Onose H, Moore BK. Influence of dentin primer application methods on dentin bond strength. Oper Dent 21(4): 167-72, 1996.

34. McDonough WG, Antonucci JM, He J, Shimada Y, Chiang MY, Schumacher GE, Schultheisz CR. A microshear test to measure bond strengths of dentin-polymer interfaces. Biomaterials 23(17): 3603-8, 2002.

35. Hu M, Weiger R, Fischer J. Comparison of two test designs for evaluating the shear bond strength of resin composite cements. Dent Mater 32(2): 223-32, 2016.

36. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM, Sano H, Nakajima M, Yoshiyama M, Shono Y, Fernandes CA, Tay F. The microtensile bond test: a review. J Adhes Dent 1(4): 299-309, 1999.

37. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 27(2): 89-99, 1999.

38. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Coutinho E, Poitevin A, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Micro-tensile bond strength of adhesives bonded to Class-I cavity-bottom dentin after thermo-cycling. Dent Mater 21(11): 999-1007, 2005.

39. Dos Santos PA, Garcia PPNS, Palma-Dibb RG. Shear bond strength of adhesive systems to enamel and dentin. Thermocycling influence. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine 16(8): 727-32, 2005.

40. Barclay CW, Boyle EL, Williams R, Marquis PM. The effect of thermocycling on five adhesive luting cements. J Oral Rehabil 29(6): 546-52, 2002.

41. Pashley DH, Sano H, Ciucchi B, Yoshiyama M, Carvalho RM. Adhesion testing of dentin bonding agents: a review. Dent Mater 11(2): 117-25, 1995.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Submission Turnaround Time