Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 10, 2026
Roughness Impact of Piezoelectric Dental Scaler on Two Distinct Flowable Composite Filling Materials
Published on: January 10, 2025
Bioengineering perspectives on adhesive delivery: performance analysis of dental microapplicators
Rim Bourgi1,2,3, Celso Afonso Klein Junior4, Laura Rebelo Allram5
1Department of Restorative and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint-Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
Background:
The precise and consistent application of adhesive systems is essential for achieving reliable bonding in restorative dentistry. Microapplicators are commonly used for adhesive delivery; however, variations in their structural quality and performance may affect clinical outcomes.
Objective:
This study evaluated four commercially available microapplicator brands-Angelus, FGM, KG Sorensen, and SDI-regarding the quality of their active tips (bristle configuration) and adhesive delivery capacity.
Methods:
A total of 160 microapplicators (40 per brand) were analyzed. Optical microscopy (15 per brand) assessed bristle integrity before and after use. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM; 10 per brand) evaluated surface morphology (five unused and five used applicators per brand). Adhesive release capacity (15 per brand) was determined by weighing each microapplicator before adhesive loading, after loading, and following application to a standardized cavity. Data was analyzed using One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Results:
New microapplicators from Angelus, KG Sorensen, and SDI displayed uniform bristle arrangements without visible gaps. After use, SDI and Angelus maintained superior bristle cohesion, whereas FGM showed the greatest deformation and sparse bristle distribution. Despite morphological differences, all brands delivered adhesive with comparable efficiency, exceeding 96% release.
Conclusions:
SDI microapplicators demonstrated the highest structural stability and resistance to deformation, followed by Angelus, KG Sorensen, and FGM. Although adhesive release capacity was consistent across all brands, differences in bristle quality may influence handling characteristics and clinical precision.
