Aim: This research evaluates the nanoleakage in Adper single bond 2, Clearfil SE BOND 2, and G-bond plus adhesive systems . Materials and Methods: Forty-five freshly extracted human maxillary premolar were selected for measuring their nanoleakage. The selected teeth were divided into three main groups according to adhesive systems (n=15). Group I: etch and rinse system (Adper single bond 2), group II: self-etch two-step system (Clearfil SE BOND 2), group III: self-etch all in one system (G-bond Plus). Each group was divided into 3 subgroups according to storage time (n=5) (one day, one month, six months. MOD cavity was prepared with 2.5 depth and 2 mm width and restored with restorative materials before nanoleakage at dentin adhesive interface is measured with a scanning electron microscope . Results: The result of this study revealed that Adper single bond 2 is inferior to G- bond plus then Clearfil SE BOND 2 . Conclusions: Clearfil SE BOND 2 seems to be an efficient adhesive. The storage in water for long periods has a highly significant adverse effect on the nanoleakage.
Basha, I. (2021). Assessment of Nano-leakage for Three Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study. Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal, 4(2), 109-116. doi: 10.21608/aadj.2021.206571
MLA
Ibrahim El dossoky Basha. "Assessment of Nano-leakage for Three Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study". Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal, 4, 2, 2021, 109-116. doi: 10.21608/aadj.2021.206571
HARVARD
Basha, I. (2021). 'Assessment of Nano-leakage for Three Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study', Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal, 4(2), pp. 109-116. doi: 10.21608/aadj.2021.206571
VANCOUVER
Basha, I. Assessment of Nano-leakage for Three Adhesive Systems: An In Vitro Study. Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal, 2021; 4(2): 109-116. doi: 10.21608/aadj.2021.206571
)
View on SCiNiTO