ACTA-1-2009-PELICULAS:1-2009 12/06/2009 02:02 p.m.

Página 41

41

INFLUENCE OF DESENSITIZING AGENTS ON THE MICROSHEAR

BOND STRENGTH OF ADHESIVE SYSTEMS TO DENTIN

Fernando A. Maeda1, Ana P.A. Guedes2, Anderson Catelan2, Sabrina Pavan1,

André L.F. Briso2, Renato H. Sundfeld2, Paulo H. dos Santos1
1
Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics.
2
Department of Restorative Dentistry. São Paulo State University –
Araçatuba School of Dentistry, UNESP, Brazil.

ABSTRACT dentin adhesive application. Z250 composite resin tubes were

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of desensitiz-
ing agents on the micro-shear bond strength of adhesive
systems to dentin. Forty bovine teeth were divided into 8
groups (n=5): G1 - Single Bond (SB); G2 - G.H.F. + SB; G3 -
Desensibilize + SB; G4 - Dessensiv + SB; G5 - Single Bond 2
(SB2); G6 - G.H.F. + SB2; G7 - Desensibilize + SB2; G8 -
Dessensiv + SB2. In all of the groups, the desensitizing agents
were applied after phosphoric acid etching and before the
bonded on the treated surface. After 24 hours, the teeth were
tested in a universal machine. Data were submitted to ANOVA
and Tukey’s test (5%). The results showed that the groups
where Desensibilize and Dessensiv were applied exhibited
smaller bond strength values.
Key words: desensitizing agents, dentinal adhesive, micro-
shear bond strength.

INFLUÊNCIA DOS AGENTES DESSENSIBILIZANTES SOBRE A RESISTÊNCIA

AO MICRO-CISALHAMENTO DE SISTEMAS ADESIVOS PARA DENTINA

RESUMO aplicação adesiva. A resina composta Z250 foi colocada

O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito dos agentes
dessensibilizantes sobre a resistência de micro-cisalhamento
de sistemas adesivos à dentina. Quarenta dentes bovinos
foram divididos em 8 grupos (n = 5): G1 - Single Bond (SB);
G2 - GHF + SB; G3 - Desensibilize + SB; G4 - Dessensiv +
SB; G5 - Single Bond 2 (SB2); G6 - GHF + SB2; G7 - Desen-
sibilize + SB2; G8 - Dessensiv + SB2. Em todos os grupos,
os agentes dessensibilizantes foram aplicados após o condi-
cionamento da dentina com ácido fosfórico e antes da
sobre a superfície tratada. Após 24 horas, os dentes foram
submetidos ao teste em uma máquina universal. Os dados
foram submetidos à ANOVA e teste de Tukey (5%). Os resul-
tados mostraram que os grupos onde foram aplicados
Desensibilize e Dessensiv exibiram menores valores de
resistência ao micro-cisalhamento.
Palavras chave: agentes dessensibilizantes, adesivos denti-
nários, micro-cisalhamento.

INTRODUCTION gingival recession or periodontal therapy7. Abrasion

Post-operative sensitivity is commonly found in vital
teeth after the use of adhesive systems that require
acid etching. Some clinical studies have revealed the
presence of post-operative discomfort in up to 14%
subjects after the restorative procedure1,2.
Dentin sensitivity (DS) is a great challenge to the
dentist3,4. It is a painful clinical condition that affects
40 million Americans who present some kind of dis-
comfort at any time during their life5. Murray6
(1994) reported that the mean prevalence of sensi-
tive teeth is 14.8% in six countries around the world.
Exposed dentin can be sensitive to mechanical, ther-
mal or osmotic stimuli. The non-carious etiologies
for DS are abrasion, abfraction or erosion lesions,
is the most common loss of dental structure, caused
by brushing techniques and the use of abrasive tooth-
paste. Abfraction is the loss of current dental struc-
tures, caused by traumatic occlusion loads. Erosion
is the chemical dissolution of the dental structure,
frequently caused by gastric acids, diet or the dental
environment. DS can also be a post-operative com-
plication associated with dental procedures.
Morphological and physiological studies suggest
that dentin hypersensitivity results from exposure
of dentin surfaces to the oral environment8,9. Nowa-
days, the most accepted theory to explain DS is the
hydrodynamic theory of Brännström10 (1992), who
suggested that dentin sensitivity originates after the

Vol. 22 Nº 1 / 2009 / 41-45 ISSN 0326-4815 Acta Odontol. Latinoam. 2009

ACTA-1-2009-PELICULAS:1-2009 12/06/2009 02:02 p.m. Página 42

42 Fernando A. Maeda, Ana P. A. Guedes, Anderson Catelan et al.

Table 1: Materials used in this study

Materials Composition Manufacturer Batch #

Adper Single Bond Bis-GMA, HEMA, ethanol, water 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA 1GA

Adper Single Bond 2 Bis-GMA, HEMA, dymetacrylate, 3M ESPE, Irvine, CA, USA HYK
ethanol, water,

Z-250 Bis-GMA, UDMA, Bis-EMA, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA 5RF
Zircon/silica

Tooth Conditioner Gel 37% Phosphoric acid Dentsply Latin America, 242437
Petrópolis, RJ, Brazil

Desensibilize Strontium chloride, potassium FGM Produtos Odontológicos, 02 Mar 05

nitrate, water, thickener and Joinville, SC, Brazil
humectant

Dessensiv Potassium oxalate, potassium S.S.White, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 003

fluoride, potassium nitrate, Brazil
hydroxyethylcellulose,
phosphoric acid and water

G.H.F. Glutaraldehyde, HEMA Biodinâmica, Ibiporã, PR, Brazil 479/05

displacement of the tubular fluid, stimulating a Tooth preparation

nerve receptor, which results in the transmission of
the stimuli10.
Based on this hypothesis, desensitizing agents have
been used for treatment of DS. These agents have
different mechanisms of action, but generally seek to
obliterate the dentin tubules, precipitate proteins that
constitute Tomes process (silver nitrate, zinc chlo-
ride), inhibit the formation and deposition of crystals
in the mouth and interior of the dentin tubules (fluo-
ride compounds, strontium chloride, potassium
oxalate), or cover the dentin by impregnation of the
tubules. Finally, some agents employ dentin bonding
agents with and without resin-based composite11,12.
Few studies evaluating the effect of desensitizing
on micro-shear bond strength of bonding agents to
dentin have been reported in the literature. Thus,
this study evaluated the influence of some desensi-
tizing agents on the bond strength of adhesive sys-
tems to dentin.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The compositions, manufacturers and batch num-
bers of the materials used in this study are listed in
Table 1.
Forty bovine incisors were stored in distilled water
at room temperature for 1 month until the beginning
of the study. The teeth were cleaned and polished
using pumice and water with a brush in a low-speed
handpiece. The roots were sectioned and the crowns
embedded in acrylic resin (Clássico, Dental Prod-
ucts, São Paulo, SP, Brazil) in PVC tubes, with the
buccal surface 1 mm above the edge of the tube.
The buccal surface of each tooth was ground with
wet 180-, 400-, and 600-grit silicon carbide abra-
sive paper in a horizontal grinder (APL-4, Arotec,
São Paulo, SP, Brazil) until a dentin surface was
exposed. The exposed dentin surface was then
examined using a 63X stereoscopic loupe (Carl
Zeiss, Jena, Germany) for complete removal of
enamel. Teeth were randomly divided into 8 groups
(n=5), according to the bonding procedures.
Bonding procedures
All the samples were etched with 37% phosphoric
acid for 15 seconds and rinsed with water for 20
seconds. The surfaces were gently dried with
absorbing paper and submitted to the procedure
described below (Table 2).

Acta Odontol. Latinoam. 2009 ISSN 0326-4815 Vol. 22 Nº 1 / 2009 / 41-45

ACTA-1-2009-PELICULAS:1-2009 12/06/2009 02:02 p.m. Página 43

Influence of desensitizing agents on the microshear... 43

Z250 composite resin cylinders

Table 2: Bonding procedures in the tested groups
were prepared inserting the
composite in Tygon-Micro- Group Desensitizing agent Wash Adhesive
bone (TGY-030, Small Parts G1 None None Single Bond
Inc.) tubes, 0.7 mm in internal G2 G.H.F. (30s) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond
diameter and 0.7 mm in height, G3 Desensibilize (10 min) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond
and photo-cured for 20 seconds G4 Dessensiv (30s) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond
using Ultralux (Dabi Atlanti,
G5 None None Single Bond 2
Ribeirão Preto, Brazil) with
500 mW/cm2, and the tip posi- G6 G.H.F. (30s) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond 2
tioned close to the Tygon G7 Desensibilize (10 min) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond 2
microtubes. After the proce- G8 Dessensiv (30s) rinsed in water (60s) Single Bond 2
dure, the tubes were removed
carefully. Three cylinders of
Z250 composite resin were bonded with the dentin Dessensibilize and Dessensiv, decreased the micro-
adhesive in each prepared tooth in all of the groups. shear bond strength for Single Bond (16.04 ± 2.91
All teeth were stored in distilled water for 24 hours MPa; 14.85 ± 2.11 MPa) and Single Bond 2 (15.02 ±
at 37ºC. 0.75 MPa; 15.97 ± 2.51 MPa) (p<0.05). These results
are shown in Fig. 1.
Microshear bond test Fig. 2 demonstrates that, in all of the studied groups,
The samples were submitted to micro-shear bond there was no statistically significant difference in
testing in a universal machine EMIC (model DL micro-shear bond strength between the two dentin
3000) operated at 0.5 mm/minute. For this proce- adhesives (p>0.05).
dure, an orthodontic wire - 0.3 mm in diameter and
5 mm in length - was used to form a loop involving DISCUSSION
the composite cylinder in the bonded area, induc- The choice of dentin adhesive should consider both
ing a tensile effort which generated a shear move- its final adhesion to dentine and its capacity to resist
ment. The micro-shear bond strength was calculated the stress generated by the polymerization of the
by the following formula: restoring material13, in order to avoid the invasion
R = F/A where: R is the micro-shear bond strength; of bacteria and post-operative sensitivity.
F is the applied force; and A is the bonded area. Dentin desensitizing agents have been used before
The micro-shear bond strength values were submit- the application of dentin adhesives that require acid
ted to two-way ANOVA and the
averages compared by Tukey’s
test (5%).

RESULTS
For Single Bond dentin adhe-
sive, the control (23.79 ± 4.58
MPa) and G.H.F. (20.68 ± 3.82
MPa) groups exhibited the high-
est values of micro-shear bond
strength, with no statistical dif-
ference between them (p>0.05).
Similarly, these groups present-
ed the highest values when Sin-
gle Bond 2 was used as dentin
adhesive (22.51 ± 2.13 MPa; Fig. 1: Micro-shear bond strength, comparing the groups for both Single Bond and
20.39 ± 4.28 MPa, respectively). Single Bond 2 dentin adhesives. Bars with different letters are statistically different
The application of the agents, (p<0.05).

Vol. 22 Nº 1 / 2009 / 41-45 ISSN 0326-4815 Acta Odontol. Latinoam. 2009

ACTA-1-2009-PELICULAS:1-2009 12/06/2009 02:02 p.m. Página 44

44 Fernando A. Maeda, Ana P. A. Guedes, Anderson Catelan et al.

adhesives under study. Desensi-

bilize contains strontium chlo-
ride in its composition; the
decrease in bond strength
observed with this material may
be due to the deposition of crys-
tals, formed by the change in the
calcium of the dentine as a
result of its interaction with
strontium. Seara23 et al. (2002)
reported that the formation of
acid-resistant crystals is caused
by the reaction between stron-
tium chloride and dentin and
Fig. 2: Micro-shear bond strength, comparing the Single Bond and Single Bond 2 could inhibit, chemically and/or
dentin adhesives for all the treated groups. Bars with different letters are statistically
different (p<0.05).
physically, the permeability of
dentin and mechanical retention
among the resinous monomers
etching, to prevent dentin sensitivity. According to in the dentin. Permeability would be one of the most
Brannström’s Hydrodynamic theory10 (1992), important factors in incomplete infiltration of the
dentin sensitivity originates from the dentinal fluid adhesive, decreasing the bond strength to dentin24. In
displacement due to dentin exposure. Within this some studies, the use of desensitizing agents reduced
context, desensitizing agents act as a type of plo- dentin permeability by 80%25-27.
sive, obliterating the dental tubules. The application of Dessensiv caused a decrease in
G.H.F. is a desensitizing agent, containing glu- the micro-shear bond strength for both adhesives
taraldehyde and HEMA. Glutaraldehyde is believed when compared with the control groups (Fig. 1).
to provoke dentinal fluid protein coagulation, and This effect could be attributed to the presence of
coagulation is facilitated by HEMA that is highly potassium oxalate, which reacts with the dentin,
water soluble.14,15 forming calcium oxalate crystals. This result is in
Some researchers have reported the clinical efficien- keeping with Al Qahtani28 et al. (2003) and Have-
cy of glutaraldehyde and HEMA containing products man & Charlton29 (1994), who obtained lower val-
in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity16,17. Prior ues when desensitizing materials with potassium
application of G.H.F. did not show any statistical dif- oxalate in their composition were used.
ference with the control groups for both the adhe- The compositions of Single Bond and Single Bond
sives under study (Figure 1). These results agree with 2 dentin adhesives are similar, with the latter includ-
those obtained by Cobb18 et al. (1997), Reinhardt19 et ing 10% w/w spherical 5 nm diameter silica parti-
al. (1995) and Soeno20 et al. (2001), who used a prod- cles. It is suggested by the manufacturer that the
uct containing glutaraldehyde and HEMA, that did nanoparticles may create a more uniform hybrid
not interfere in the bonding of resinous cements to layer, and contribute to increasing the bond strength
the dentine. In our study, however, the product was to dentin. However, in our study, no difference in
applied before acid conditioning. the micro-shear bond strength was observed, even
The efficiency of adhesion is related to factors such in the treated groups (Fig. 2).
as viscosity and degree of conversion of the adhesive
and the collapse of the collagen fibril mesh that may CONCLUSION
hinder the penetration of the monomers into the inter- The results obtained in this study suggest that
fibril spaces and the complete involvement of the col- G.H.F. does not interfere in the micro-shear bond
lagen fibrils exposed for conditioning etching21,22. strength of dentin adhesives to dentin; however, the
The groups treated with Desensibilize demonstrated desensitizing agents, Desensibilize and Dessensiv,
a reduction in bond strength that was statistically sig- reduced the bond strength when Single Bond and
nificant in relation to the control groups for both Single Bond 2 were used.

Acta Odontol. Latinoam. 2009 ISSN 0326-4815 Vol. 22 Nº 1 / 2009 / 41-45

ACTA-1-2009-PELICULAS:1-2009 12/06/2009 02:02 p.m. Página 45
Influence of desensitizing agents on the microshear...
CORRESPONDENCE
Dr. Paulo Henrique dos Santos
Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics
Araçatuba School of Dentistry - UNESP
Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 Araçatuba - SP. Brazil
Zip code: 16015-050
paulosantos@foa.unesp.br
REFERENCES
1. Opdam NJ, Feilzer AJ, Roeters JJ, Smale I. Class I oclusal
composite resin restorations: in vivo post-operative sensitivity,
wall adaptation, and microleakage. J Dent 1998;11:229-234.
2. Unemori M, Matsuya Y, Akashi A, Goto Y, Akamine A.
Composite resin restoration and postoperative sensitivity:
clinical follow-up in an undergraduate program. J Dent
2001;29:7-13.
3. Jain P, Reinhardt JW, Krell KV. Effect of dentin desensitiz-
ers and dentin bonding agents on dentin permeability. Am J
Dent 2000;13:21-27.
4. Markowitz K, Pashley DH. Discovering new treatments for
sensitive teeth: the long path from biology to therapy. J Oral
Rehabil 2008;35:300-315.
5. Scherman A, Jacobsen PL. Managing dentin hypersensitiv-
ity: What treatment to recommend to patients. J Am Dent
Assoc 1992;123:57-61.
6. Murray LE, Roberts AJ. The prevalence of self reported
hypersensitive teeth. Arch Oral Biol 1994;39:129.
7. Peres CR, Sergio PP, Silva FF. Hiperestesia dentinária: Eti-
ologia, diagnóstico e forma de tratamento. Rev Bras
Odontol 1999;56:204-207.
8. Paes Leme AF, Dos Santos JC, Giannini M, Wada RS.
Occlusion of dentin tubules by desensitizer agents. Am J
Dent 2004;17:368-372.
9. Sykes LM. Dentine hypersensitivity: a review of its aetiol-
ogy, pathogenesis and management. SADJ 2007; 62:66-71.
10. Brännström M. Etiology of dentin hypersensitivity. Proc
Finn Dent Soc 1992;88:7-13.
11. Absi EG, Addy M, Adams D. Dentine hypersensitivy. A
study of the patency of dentinal tubules in sensitive and
non-sensitive cervical dentine. J Clin Periodontol 1987;
14:280-284.
12. Aranha AC, Siqueira Junior AS, Cavalcante LM, Pimenta
LA, Marchi GM. Microtensile bond strengths of composite
to dentin treated with desensitizer products. J Adhes Dent
2006;8:85-90.
13. Tao L, Pashley DH, Boyd L. Effect of different types of
smear layers on dentin and enamel shear bond strengths.
Dent Mater 1988;4:208-216.
14. Schupback P, Lutz F, Finger WJ. Closing of dentinal tubules
by Gluma desensitizer. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105:414-421.
15. Omae M, Inoue M, Itota T, Finger WJ, Inoue M, Tanaka K,
Yamamoto K, Yoshiyama M. Effect of a desensitizing agent
containing glutaraldehyde and HEMA on bond strength to
Er:YAG laser-irradiated dentine. J Dent 2007;35:398-402.
Vol. 22 Nº 1 / 2009 / 41-45 ISSN 0326-4815
45
16. Dondi Dall’orologio G, Lorenzi R, Anselmi M, Opisso V.
Dentin desensitizer effects of Gluma Alternate, Health-
Dent Desensitizer and Scotchbond Multi-Purpose. Am J
Dent 1999;12:103-106.
17. Duran I, Sengun A. The long-term effectiveness of five cur-
rent desensitizer products on cervical dentine sensitivity. J
Oral Rehabil 2004;34:351-356.
18. Cobb DS, Reinhardt JW, Vargas MA.. Effect of HEMA-
containing dentin desensitizers on shear bond strength of
resin cement. Am J Dent 1997;10:62-65.
19. Reinhardt JW, Stephens NH, Fortin D. Effect of Gluma
desensitization on dentin bond strength. Am J Dent 1995;
8:170-172.
20. Soeno K, Taira Y, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Effect of desen-
sitizers on bond strength of adhesive luting agents to dentin.
J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:1122-1128.
21. Pashley DH, Zhang Y, Agee KA, Rouse CJ, Carvalho RM,
Russell CM. Permeability of demineralized dentin to
HEMA. Dent Mater 2000;16:7-14.
22. De Andrade e Silva SM, Marquezini L, Manso AP, Garcia
FP, Carrilho MR, Pashley DH, Tay FR, Carvalho RM.
Effects of a combined application of potassium oxalate
gel/adhesive agent on dentin permeability in vitro. J Adhes
Dent 2007;9:505-512.
23. Seara SF, Erthal BS, Ribeiro M, Kroll L, Pereira GDS.
The influence of a dentin desensitizer on the microtensile
bond strength of two bonding systems. Oper Dent 2002;
27:154-160.
24. Tagami J, Tao L, Pashley DH. Correlation among dentin
depth, permeability and bond strength of adhesive resins.
Dent Mater 1990;6:45-50.
25. Camps J, Pizant S, Dejou J, Franquin JC. Effects of desen-
sitizer agents in human dentin permeability. Am J Dent
1998;11:286-290.
26. Jain P, Vargas MA, Denehy GE, Boyer DB. Dentin desen-
sitizer agents: SEM and X-ray microanalysis assessment.
Am J Dent 1997;10:21-26.
27. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM, Pereira JC, Villanueva R, Tay
FR. The use of oxalate to reduce dentin permeability under
adhesive restorations. Am J Dent 2001;14:89-94.
28. Al Qahtani MQ, Platt JA, Moore BK, Cochran MA. The
effect on shear bond strength of rewetting dry dentin with
two desensitizers. Oper Dent 2003;28:287-296.
29. Haveman CW, Charlton DG. Dentin treatment with an
oxalate solution and glass ionomer bond strength. Am J
Dent 1994;7:247-251.
Acta Odontol. Latinoam. 2009