Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 27, 2026
Standardized Protocol to Evaluate the Effect of Surface Treatments, Luting Cements, and Thermocycling on PEEK–Composite Bond Strength
Published on: June 9, 2026
Enhanced bond strengths of compomers using two dentin bonding systems
Phanthavong Somphone1, Patricia N R Pereira, Toru Nikaido
1Department of Restorative Sciences, Cariology and Operative Dentistry, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Japan.
Purpose:
To measure bond strengths of three commercial compomers using recent dentin bonding systems, and to observe the micromorphology of the cross-sectional interface of the bonded specimens.
Materials And Methods:
One hundred and ten bovine teeth stored frozen were used. The dentin surfaces were ground flat with #600-grit silicon carbide paper, and divided into three groups for bonding: original bonding system group (Xeno Bond/Xeno, Prime&Bond 2.1/Dyract AP, and F2000 Primer/Adhesive/F2000 compomer), Clearfil Liner Bond 2V group (LB 2V/Xeno, LB2V/Dyract AP, LB2V/F2000 compomer, LB2V/AP-X), and Single Bond group (SB/Xeno, SB/Dyract AP, F2000 compomer, SB/Z100). After the bonding procedures had been performed, the bonded assemblies were stored in water for 24 hours at 37 degrees C. Then, tensile bond strengths were measured using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/minute. All data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Fisher's PLSD at 95% of confidence. Specimens for SEM observations were bonded in the same manner as for the tensile bond test, cut in half, and embedded in epoxy resin. These were then polished to high gloss, gold sputter-coated, and observed with the SEM.
Results:
Compomers bonded to dentin with recent dentin bonding systems showed significantly higher bond strengths than those with the original bonding systems (P< 0.05). Tensile bond strength of Clearfil Liner Bond 2V was also significantly higher than that of Single Bond (P< 0.05). SEM observations showed good interaction between the compomers, adhesive systems, and dentin with any restorative material used. For Xeno Bond/Xeno, Prime & Bond 2.1/Dyract AP, and Primer/Adhesive/F2000 compomer, the thicknesses of the hybrid layer were approximately 0.8-1.1 microm, 0.3-0.5 microm, and 0.7-1.5 microm respectively. On the other hand, the hybrid layer produced by LB2V was approximately 0.5 to 1.0 microm, whereas for SB was approximately 3.1 to 4.1 microm thick. The thickness of the hybrid layers created in each bonded sample depended on the adhesive material used.
Related Concept Videos
02:40Chemical Bonds
Atoms participate in a chemical bond formation to acquire a completed valence-shell electron configuration similar to that of the noble gas nearest to it in atomic number. Ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds are some of the important types of chemical bonds. Bond energy and bond length determine the strength of a chemical bond.
Types of Chemical Bonds
An ionic bond is formed due to electrostatic attraction between cations and anions. Often, the ions are formed by the transfer of electrons from...
01:12Bonding and Strength of Aggregate
00:43Complexometric Titration: Ligands
01:18Composite Masonry Walls
01:19Complexation Equilibria: The Chelate Effect
01:20Strength of Cement
For compressive strength tests, ASTM C 109-05 standards prescribe a cement-sand mix ratio of 1:2.75 and a water/cement ratio of 0.485 for making 2-inch cubes. These cubes are mixed, cast, and cured in saturated lime water at 23°C until testing. Flexural strength testing, outlined in ASTM C...