Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026

08:12
Micro-dissection of Enamel Organ from Mandibular Incisor of Rats Exposed to Environmental Toxicants
Published on: March 29, 2018
Microtensile bond strength to enamel affected by hypoplastic amelogenesis imperfecta
The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry
|September 13, 2013
Summary
Both self-etching (SE) and etch-and-rinse (ER) adhesive systems show similar microtensile bond strengths to hypoplastic amelogenesis imperfecta (HPAI) enamel. This study compared SE and ER adhesives on HPAI-affected enamel, finding comparable bond strengths and analyzing etching patterns.
Area of Science:
- Dental Materials Science
- Biomaterials Engineering
- Enamel Microstructure Analysis
Background:
- Hypoplastic amelogenesis imperfecta (HPAI) presents significant challenges in dental restorative treatments due to altered enamel structure.
- Understanding the bonding efficacy of different adhesive systems to compromised enamel is crucial for long-term restoration success.
- Self-etching (SE) and etch-and-rinse (ER) adhesives represent distinct approaches to dental adhesion, with varying interactions with tooth substrates.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the microtensile bond strengths (μTBS) of SE and ER adhesive systems on HPAI-affected enamel.
- To analyze the enamel etching patterns produced by SE and ER adhesives on HPAI-affected enamel using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
- To evaluate the clinical relevance of these adhesive systems for restoring HPAI-affected teeth.
Main Methods:
- Extraction and preparation of HPAI-affected and healthy control molars for μTBS testing and SEM analysis.
- Application of two SE and two ER adhesive systems and composite resin to prepared enamel surfaces following manufacturer instructions.
- Fabrication of standardized 1-mm-thick sticks from bonded specimens for μTBS testing and SEM imaging of enamel etching patterns.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in μTBS was observed between SE and ER adhesive systems when bonded to HPAI-affected enamel (p > 0.05).
- A significant difference in bond strength was found between HPAI-affected enamel and healthy control enamel (p < 0.05).
- SEM analysis revealed mild intra- and inter-prismatic etching on HPAI enamel with orthophosphoric acid (ER), while SE primer created a slightly rough, grooved surface.
Conclusions:
- Both SE and ER adhesive systems demonstrate comparable bond strengths to HPAI-affected enamel.
- The findings suggest that current adhesive technologies can achieve adequate bonding to compromised enamel in HPAI.
- Further research may explore long-term durability and clinical outcomes of these adhesive systems in HPAI restorations.
