Influence of different conditioning

methods on immediate and delayed dentin

sealing
Frank Falkensammer, DMD, DMSc,a
Gerwin Vincent Arnetzl, DMD,b Angelika Wildburger, DMD,c
Christoph Krall,d and Josef Freudenthaler, DMDe
Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University
of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; School of Dentistry, Medical University
of Graz, Graz, Austria
Statement of problem. Data are needed to evaluate the effect of various conditioning methods on immediate and delayed
dentin sealing.

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to test bond strength and surface configuration of immediate and delayed dentin
sealing surfaces after applying different surface conditioning methods.

Material and methods. A total of 96 premolars were allocated to the immediate and delayed groups. The groups differed in
the timing of dentin sealing. The immediate-group specimens were sealed with a self-etching adhesive immediately after
preparation. The delayed-group specimens were sealed before the final ceramic restoration bonding. Provisional restorations
were cemented on immediate-group and delayed-group specimens for 1 week. Four conditioning methods were used:
polishing with fluoride-free pumice paste, airborne-particle abrasion with silicoated aluminum oxide, glycin, or calcium
carbonate. After 24-hour storage, the shear bond strength was tested. The fractured specimens were optically inspected with
a stereomicroscope. An optical 3-dimensional surface analysis was performed for quantitative and qualitative evaluation.
A 2-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey honestly significant difference tests for significant effects was performed to investigate
effects of the 2 factors, sealing and conditioning, and their interaction. Statistical significance was set at .05.

Results. Two-way ANOVA found significant differences between the sealing and conditioning groups. The immediate group
had significantly lower bond strengths than the delayed group. In all groups, surface polishing produced the highest bond
strengths, and airborne-particle abrasion with calcium carbonate produced the lowest. Fracture analysis found more failures
in the adhesive layers in the immediate groups and a prevalence of mixed failures in the delayed groups. The surface analysis
found significant abrasion and roughness when airborne-particle abrasion with silicoated aluminum oxide was used for
immediate and delayed dentin sealing surfaces.

Conclusions. Polishing and airborne-particle abrasion with silicoated aluminum oxide or glycin are efficient methods in
conditioning immediate and delayed dentin sealing surfaces. Airborne-particle abrasion with silicoated aluminum oxide
leaves significant surface alterations on both types of surfaces. (J Prosthet Dent 2014;-:---)

Clinical Implications
Immediate dentin sealing and delayed dentin sealing produce clinically
sufficient bond strength values, but the use of calcium carbonate as a
conditioning medium may be contraindicated because of its inconsistent
results: higher roughness is coupled with low bond strengths.

a
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Department of Orthodontics, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna;
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Clinical Department of Dental Prosthetics, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Graz.
b
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Clinical Department of Dental Prosthetics, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Graz.
c
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Department of Oral Surgery and Radiology, School of Dentistry, Medical University of Graz.
d
Senior staff, Institute of Medical Statistics, Medical University of Vienna.
e
Assistant Head, Department of Orthodontics, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna.

Falkensammer et al
2 Volume
Immediate dentin sealing (IDS) was
introduced in prosthetic dentistry as an
alternative to the conventional restora-
tion bonding.1-4 In contrast to con-
ventional procedures such as delayed
dentin sealing (DDS), dentin adhesives
are applied onto the prepared dentin
before the provisional phase, providing
decontamination of the dentin wound,
decreased postoperative sensitivity,
improved bond strength to restora-
tions, and reduced microleakage.5-12
The avoidance of polyether impres-
sion materials, air-blocking during
polymerization, and light air-blowing
of the adhesive layer are important
elements in the clinical performance
of IDS.9,13 Whether a total-etch is su-
perior to a self-etching primer method
in achieving a better bond strength
remains unclear.7,8,14 The polymerizing
mode of composite resin adhesives and
provisional storage times of up to
4 months seem to have no influence
on the IDS bond strength,7,9,15 whereas
masking of the dentin wound with a
mixed opaque adhesive material has
negative effects on the bonding
behavior.10
Another important issue in bonding
restorations is the selection of a con-
ditioning method. Whereas Magne
et al6 used airborne-particle abrasion
with aluminum oxide, Dillenburg et al15
found additional etching with phos-
phoric acid effective in conditioning
IDS surfaces. The authors identified no
data on the potential effects of the
resulting adhesive layer thickness or
surface roughness after conditioning,
which might influence the bonding
behavior.15,16
In the past, airborne-particle abra-
sion with aluminum oxide or polishing
with pumice seemed to be effective in
conditioning unsealed (DDS) dentin
surfaces.17-26 However, no data were
identified on the potential effects of the
resulting dentin abrasion or surface
roughness after conditioning, which
might influence the bonding behavior.
In addition, the increasing number of
available conditioning materials neces-
sitates investigations on their potential
effect on IDS and DDS surfaces.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
The purpose of this study was to
test the bond strength and surface
configuration of IDS and DDS surfaces
after applying different surface condi-
tioning methods. The null hypothesis
tested was that no difference in bond
strengths exists when different condi-
tioning materials are applied on IDS
and DDS surfaces.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A total of 96 human premolars
extracted because of crowding and
with no cracks, restorations, or other
defects were collected from the ortho-
dontic department. Approval was ob-
tained from the institutional review
board. Before preparation, the teeth
were disinfected in 0.5% chloramine
for 48 hours and stored at 4
C in a sa-
line solution. They were then embedded
in an acrylic resin material (SamplKwick;
Buehler Ltd). The teeth were sectioned
1 mm beneath the central groove in a
mesiodistal direction with a diamond
saw (Exakt 300; Exakt Technologies Inc)
under wet conditions. The teeth were
polished (MetaServ 250; Buehler Ltd)
with a 600-grit silicon carbide abrasive
paper under wet conditions. The sur-
faces were inspected under stereomi-
croscope (magnification 10, Mantis
FX; Vision Engineering) to disclose
enamel remnants.
The specimens were allocated to
2 groups: the IDS group and the DDS
group. Each sealing group consisted
of 4 subgroups (n¼11) representing
the distinct conditioning method. No
power analysis was used to determine
sample size, which was based on com-
parable bond strength studies focusing
on immediate and delayed dentin
sealing.9,18,23
The allocated specimens were
conditioned with polishing with
fluoride-free pumice paste (Depurdent;
Dr Wild & Co AG) (polish group);
airborne-particle abrasion with sili-
coated aluminum oxide (CoJet Sand/
CoJet Prep; 3M ESPE) (SiO2 group);
airborne-particle abrasion with glycin
(Air-Flow Powder Soft/Air-Flow Master;
EMS Electro Medical Systems SA) (glycin
- Issue -
group); or airborne-particle abrasion
with calcium carbonate powder
(Prophy-Mate Cleaning Powder/Prophy-
Mate Neo; NSK) (CaCO3 group).
In the IDS group, a 2-step self-etching
dentin adhesive system (AdheSE; Ivo-
clar Vivadent) was used according to
the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Light-polymerization (Bluephase; Ivoclar
Vivadent) was initiated for 5 seconds at
650 mW/cm2 followed by an air-barrier
application (Liquid Strip; Ivoclar Viva-
dent) and light-polymerization for a
further 20 seconds.
A polyvinyl siloxane (Express; 3M
ESPE) served as impression material in all
groups. Interim onlays (Protemp 4; 3M
ESPE) were fabricated for each spec-
imen. The IDS surfaces were isolated with
castor oil to prevent any interactions
between the adhesive materials. The
interim restorations were cemented with
eugenol-free interim cement (Temp
Bond NE; Kerr Corp) and then stored in a
saline solution at 37
C for 1 week.
The immersed specimens were dried
oil-free, and the interim restorations
and cement were carefully removed with
a hand instrument. According to the
protocol, the specimens in the subgroups
received one of the previously described
conditioning procedures. They were
either conditioned with polishing with a
fluoride-free pumice paste at 1000 rpm
for 5 seconds (Fig. 1A), airborne-particle
abrasion with silicoated aluminum oxide
(see Fig. 1B), glycin (see Fig. 1C), or cal-
cium carbonate powder (see Fig. 1D).
The airborne-particle abrasion pro-
cedures were performed for 5 seconds
with a fabricated holding appliance to
ensure a consistent distance (2 cm) and
angle (90 degrees). The air pressures were
set according to the manufacturers’ rec-
ommendations, and the specimens were
stirred for a constant conditioning effect.
Airborne-particle abrasion with silicoated
aluminum oxide was performed in dry
conditions, and airborne-particle abra-
sion with glycin and calcium carbonate
was performed in wet conditions. Each
specimen was rinsed and dried thor-
oughly to remove any particles from
the conditioned surface. Adhesive tapes
(8905 polyester tape; 3M) punched with
Falkensammer et al
- 2014 3

1 A, Scanning electron micrograph (magnification 1000) of fluoride-free pumice paste. B, Scanning electron micrograph
(magnification 1000) of silicoated aluminum oxide powder. C, Scanning electron micrograph (magnification 1000) of
glycin powder. D, Scanning electron micrograph (magnification 1000) of calcium carbonate powder.

33-mm squares were bonded onto the
specimen surfaces to standardize the
bonding surface.
Prefabricated feldspathic ceramic
blocks (Vitablocs Mark II; Vita Zahn-
fabrik) with an individualized rectan-
gular shape (33 mm; height, 4 mm)
were used in this study as the restoration
material. After conditioning with 5%
hydrofluoric acid (Ceramics etch; Vita
Zahnfabrik) for 60 seconds, the speci-
mens were rinsed, silanated (Monobond
Plus; Ivoclar Vivadent), and coated
with adhesive (AdheSE; Ivoclar Viva-
dent) according to the manufacturers’
recommendations.
IDS specimens were coated with a
second layer of the adhesive component,
only omitting the self-etching primer.
Falkensammer et al
The DDS specimens were primed with
both components of the self-etching
adhesive.
The dual-polymerizing resin adhesive
(Variolink II; Ivoclar Vivadent) was
mixed for each testing group separately
and applied on the prepared ceramic
restoration surfaces with a microbrush
(Microbrush tube; Microbrush Intl). The
ceramic restorations were seated with a
load of 1 N. Excessive resin material was
cautiously removed, an air-barrier was
applied (Liquid Strip; Ivoclar Vivadent),
and light-polymerization was performed
at 650 mW/cm2 (Bluephase; Ivoclar
Vivadent) for 20 seconds on each side.
The specimens were stored at 37
C in
saline solution for 24 hours before bond
strength testing.
The bond strength test was per-
formed with a universal testing machine
(Z010-TND; Zwick) at 0.5 mm/min
crosshead speed. The acrylic resin
specimen blocks were aligned sepa-
rately and fixed in the testing machine.
The data were measured and stored
concomitantly by a processor directly
connected to the testing machine.
The bond strength data obtained
from the different testing groups were
analyzed with a 2-way ANOVA for the
variables (sealing method and condi-
tioning) and the Tukey honestly signif-
icant difference tests. The confidence
level was set at 95% and a¼.05. All
statistical analyses were performed
with software (SAS 9.3; SAS Institute
Inc).
4 Volume - Issue -

Optical analysis was performed with
a stereoscopic microscope (magni-
fication 20, Mantis FX; Vision Engi-
neering) to determine the failure mode
of the specimens. Depending on the
location, failure was defined as adhe-
sive, mixed, cohesive in the dentin, or
cohesive in the ceramic material.10
The roughness and surface abrasion
was investigated with an optical 3-
dimensional (3D) surface analysis
(InfiniteFocus G4; Alicona Imaging
GmbH) for each test group (Figs. 2, 3).
An adhesive tape (8905 polyester tape;
3M) was bonded on one half of each
IDS and DDS specimen. After each
conditioning procedure, the adhesive
tape was removed. The specimens were
rinsed and dried. The optical surface
analysis was performed between both
sides to evaluate the treated and un-
treated IDS and DDS surfaces at once.
Finally, the adhesive layer thickness
was measured in untreated IDS speci-
mens. The specimens were vertically
sliced in the adhesive layer with a dia-
mond saw (Exakt 300; Exakt Technologies
Inc) under wet conditions. At 3 different
sites, the thickness of the layer was
measured in a scanning electron micro-
scope (magnification 500, TM 1000;
Hitachi).
RESULTS
Two-way ANOVA (Table I) found
significant differences between the
sealing methods and between the con-
ditioning methods. The interaction be-
tween the 2 variables (conditioning and
sealing method) showed no significant
differences. Therefore, the main effect
of conditioning was investigated after
collapsing the factor sealing.
The results of the shear bond strength
test are displayed in Table II. The Tukey
honestly significant difference tests
found a significant difference between
airborne-particle abrasion with calcium
carbonate and polishing with fluoride-
free pumice paste, yielding lower bond
strengths for the calcium carbonate
subgroup. Airborne-particle abrasion
with silicoated aluminum oxide or glycin
showed no significant difference to the
other conditioning groups. Overall, the
shear bond strength was higher with the
DDS method (mean, 19.5 MPa; SD, 4.0)
than with the IDS method (mean, 13.7
MPa; SD, 4.7).
The failure analysis (Table III) found
a prevalence of adhesive failures in all
IDS groups, whereas a prevalence of
mixed failures was observed when the
DDS surfaces were conditioned with
polishing with fluoride-free pumice
paste or airborne-particle abrasion with
silicoated aluminum oxide.
The optical surface analysis
(Table IV) found an increased surface
roughness when the adhesive layers
(IDS) or the dentin surfaces (DDS) were
conditioned with airborne-particle
abrasion with silicoated aluminum ox-
ide or calcium carbonate. The rough-
ness of the dentin surfaces (DDS) was
decreased when polished with fluoride-
free pumice paste only. The surface
abrasion of the adhesive layers (IDS) or
the dentin surfaces (DDS) was signifi-
cantly increased when airborne-particle

2 A, Surface abrasion of immediate dentin sealing specimen after airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder.
B, Roughness of immediate dentin sealing specimen before airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder. C, Roughness
of immediate dentin sealing specimen after airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Falkensammer et al
- 2014 5

3 A, Surface abrasion of delayed dentin sealing specimen after airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder. B, Roughness
of delayed dentin sealing specimen before airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder. C, Roughness of delayed dentin
sealing specimen after airborne-particle abrasion with glycin powder.

Table I. Two-way ANOVA for effects of sealing method and conditioning abrasion with silicoated aluminum ox-
methods on shear bond strength ide was used. The adhesive layers (IDS)
were additionally abraded when pol-
Type III Sum Mean
ished with fluoride-free pumice paste.
Source df of Squares Square F P
Measurement of the adhesive layer
Sealing method 1 733.9 733.9 41.1 <.001 thickness of the untreated IDS speci-
mens showed a mean value of 50 mm
Conditioning method 3 218.5 72.8 4.1 .009
(SD, 3.87).
Sealing  conditioning 3 13.5 4.5 0.3 .859
DISCUSSION

Table II. Shear bond strength (MPa): mean and SD of conditioning methods Conditioning of the sealed (IDS) or
unsealed (DDS) dentin surface for
Polish SiO2 Glycin CaCO3 definitive restoration bonding was of
18.6 (4.4) 17.1 (5.4) 16.5 (5.4) 14.2 (5.1)
interest in this study, because different
conditioning materials might influence
A AB AB B
the bond strength or the surface
Values of groups having same letter are not significantly different (P>.05). configuration. Different conditioning
methods were found to influence the
bond strength of ceramic restorations
Table III. Proportion of failure modes as observed by optical microscopy
regardless of the sealing method used.
IDS DDS Thus, the null hypothesis, no difference
Failure
between the subgroups, was rejected.
mode Polish SiO2 Glycin CaCO3 Polish SiO2 Glycin CaCO3 Although the airborne-particle
Mixed 73% 64% 73% 73% 18% - 55% 91%
abrasion materials differed in their
physical and chemical properties, no
Adhesive 27% 36% 27% 27% 82% 100% 45% 9%
inconsistency was detected in the IDS
IDS, immediate dentin sealing; DDS, delayed dentin sealing. bonding performance. Reviewing the
Falkensammer et al
6 Volume
Table IV. Adhesive surface abrasion and roughness (I, before conditioning; II, after conditioning)
IDS
Abrasion Roughness I
Group [mm] [nm]
Polish 12.5 130.56
SiO2 14.8 143.21
Glycin 3.8 140.51
CaCO3 2.1 175.33
IDS, immediate dentin sealing; DDS, delayed dentin sealing.
literature, aluminum oxide was found
to be the most commonly used
airborne-particle abrasion material for
IDS testing.6,7,10,15 Magne et al6 found
higher bond strength values when
combining aluminum oxide with a
total-etch adhesive. However, when
self-etching adhesives were tested, the
results were comparable with the pre-
sent findings.9,15 Therefore, the adhe-
sive conditioning effect per se (self-etch
or total-etch) may have an effect on
IDS dentin bond strength.8
The highest bond strength values in
the IDS group were found when
fluoride-free pumice paste was used,
significantly different only to airborne-
particle abrasion with calcium carbon-
ate. The use of pumice for conditioning
was also favored in the literature,
especially when unfilled adhesives pre-
served the dentin surface.4,8,11
No differences in the distinct
airborne-particle abrasion subgroups
were seen in the DDS group. Again
the use of fluoride-free pumice paste
showed the highest bond strengths,
significantly different only compared
with airborne-particle abrasion with cal-
cium carbonate. This finding is consis-
tent with those of other investigations
testing pumice as conditioning.19,22,24
Airborne-particle abrasion with calcium
carbonate or glycin has not yet been
examined in bond strength studies.
Whereas airborne-particle abrasion
with silicoated aluminum oxide was as
effective as aluminum oxide in other
studies,17,20,23,25 sodium bicarbonate
seems to be ineffective because of
reduced bond strengths and the creation
of a smear layer.24,26,27
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Roughness II Abrasion
[nm] [mm]
205.04 1.6
973.01 9.8
206.52 4.2
621.22 0.3
Nevertheless, in the present study, the
DDS conditioning groups had signifi-
cantly higher bond strengths compared
with the IDS conditioning groups.
Magne et al,6,7,10 however, found signif-
icantly higher bond strength values,
and when comparing the sealing
methods, IDS was superior.3,8,9,12 The
reasons for these disparities may be
associated with the application of
eugenol-free cement, which may impair
the hybrid layer or the dentin surface
both physically and chemically. Another
potential reason may be the differing
bond strength testing procedures.
The distribution of the IDS failure
modes was consistent with the preva-
lence of adhesive failures in all con-
ditioning groups; such findings are
well described in the literature.8,10,15
Compromising effects such as the provi-
sional luting agent may have reduced the
adhesion of the IDS specimens. Magne
et al6,7 described fractures extending to
the dentin, which may have been caused
by the different testing procedures.
A higher variability of failure was
seen in the DDS group, especially when
dentin was conditioned with polishing
and airborne-particle abrasion with
silicoated aluminum oxide. Both con-
ditioning methods seem to influence
the bonding behavior positively, result-
ing in fractures of restorative material
and dentin similar to those in other
studies.18,22,26,14
The optical 3-dimensional surface
analysis of the IDS and DDS surfaces
found 2 major effects, surface abrasion
and roughness, with silicoated alumi-
num oxide airborne-particle abrasion
showing the most significant effects on
- Issue -
DDS
Roughness I Roughness II
[nm] [nm]
390.2 312.12
336.39 461.44
320.46 396.27
405.11 606.71
IDS and DDS surfaces. Of the 50 mm,
an adhesive layer thickness of at least
30 mm remained, as described in
the literature.15,16,18 Airborne-particle
abrasion with silicoated aluminum ox-
ide obviously does not affect the bond
strength with regard to the application
time. However, when calcium carbonate
was used for airborne-particle abrasion,
the surface roughness increased sub-
stantially with minimal abrasive effects
on the dentin surface (DDS) and ad-
hesive layer (IDS). In spite of the round
particle configuration, calcium carbon-
ate particles may be splitting on impact,
thereby creating a roughened surface.
On DDS surfaces, a reduced rough-
ness was seen when fluoride-free pumice
paste was used for polishing. Surpris-
ingly, a rougher surface with obvious
abrasion was seen in the IDS group, as
also described in the literature, allow-
ing for speculation that the physical
surface properties of dentin and adhe-
sives react differently to polishing.16 The
bond strength was not affected by the
differing qualitative surface changes.
The limitations of the study include
the bond strength testing mode, which
restricted direct comparison to only
certain studies. Moreover, the selection
of a single self-etching adhesive made
comparisons with total-etch adhesives
more difficult. The short-term and long-
term clinical performance should be
investigated in further studies.
CONCLUSIONS
DDS bond strengths are superior
to IDS bond strengths (with a 2-step
self-etching dentin adhesive (AdheSE).
Falkensammer et al
- 2014
Conditioning on IDS and DDS surfaces
with either polishing with a fluoride-
free pumice paste or airborne-particle
abrasion with silicoated aluminum ox-
ide or glycin provided a higher bond
strength than airborne-particle abra-
sion with calcium carbonate.
REFERENCES
1. Bertschinger C, Paul SJ, Luthy H, Scharer P.
Dual application of dentin bonding agents:
effect on bond strength. Am J Dent 1996;9:
115-9.
2. Paul SJ, Scharer P. The dual bonding tech-
nique: a modified method to improve adhe-
sive luting procedures. Int J Periodontics
Restorative Dent 1997;17:536-45.
3. Jayasooriya PR, Pereira PN, Nikaido T,
Tagami J. Efficacy of a resin coating on bond
strengths of resin cement to dentin. J Esthet
Restor Dent 2003;15:105-13.
4. Magne P. Immediate dentin sealing: a funda-
mental procedure for indirect bonded resto-
rations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005;17:144-54.
5. Hu J, Zhu Q. Effect of immediate dentin
sealing on preventive treatment for post-
cementation hypersensitivity. Int J
Prosthodont 2010;23:49-52.
6. Magne P, Kim TH, Cascione D, Donovan TE.
Immediate dentin sealing improves bond
strength of indirect restorations. J Prosthet
Dent 2005;94:511-9.
7. Magne P, So WS, Cascione D. Immediate
dentin sealing supports delayed restoration
placement. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98:166-74.
8. Duarte S Jr, de Freitas CR, Saad JR, Sadan A.
The effect of immediate dentin sealing on the
marginal adaptation and bond strengths of
total-etch and self-etch adhesives. J Prosthet
Dent 2009;102:1-9.
9. Lee JI, Park SH. The effect of three variables
on shear bond strength when luting a resin
inlay to dentin. Oper Dent 2009;34:288-92.
10. Magne P, Paranhos MP, Hehn J, Oderich E,
Boff LL. Selective masking for thin indirect
restorations: can the use of opaque resin affect
the dentine bond strength of immediately
sealed preparations? J Dent 2011;39:707-9.
Falkensammer et al
11. Dagostin A, Ferrari M. Effect of resins sealing
of dentin on the bond strength of ceramic
restorations. Dent Mater 2002;18:304-10.
12. Erkut S, Kucukesmen HC, Eminkahyagil N,
Imirzalioglu P, Karabulut E. Influence of pre-
vious provisional cementation on the bond
strength between two definitive resin-based
luting and dentin bonding agents and human
dentin. Oper Dent 2007;32:84-93.
13. Magne P, Nielsen B. Interactions between
impression materials and immediate dentin
sealing. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:298-305.
14. Chieffi N, Sadek F, Monticelli F, Goracci C,
Grandini S, Davidson C, et al. Effect of
dentin adhesives used as sealers and
provisional cementation on bond strength
of a resin cement to dentin. Am J Dent
2006;19:91-5.
15. Dillenburg AL, Soares CG, Paranhos MP,
Spohr AM, Loguercio AD, Burnett LH Jr.
Microtensile bond strength of prehybridized
dentin: storage time and surface treatment
effects. J Adhes Dent 2009;11:231-7.
16. Stavridakis MM, Krejci I, Magne P. Immedi-
ate dentin sealing of onlay preparations:
thickness of pre-cured dentin bonding agent
and effect of surface cleaning. Oper Dent
2005;30:747-57.
17. Chaves P, Giannini M, Ambrosano GM.
Influence of smear layer pretreatments on
bond strength to dentin. J Adhes Dent
2002;4:191-6.
18. Abo-Hamar SE, Federlin M, Hiller KA,
Friedl KH, Schmalz G. Effect of temporary
cements on the bond strength of ceramic
luted to dentin. Dent Mater 2005;21:
794-803.
19. Fonseca RB, Martins LR, Quagliatto PS,
Soares CJ. Influence of provisional cements
on ultimate bond strength of indirect
composite restorations to dentin. J Adhes
Dent 2005;7:225-30.
20. Vasconcellos WA, Alvim HH, Saad JR,
Susin AH. Effects of surface treatment on
the microtensile bond strength of ceramic
materials to dentin. Acta Odontol Latinoam
2007;20:103-7.
21. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. The effect of tooth-
preparation cleansing protocol on the bond
strength of self-adhesive resin cement to
dentin contaminated with a hemostatic
agent. Oper Dent 2011;36:18-26.
7
22. Ribeiro JC, Coelho PG, Janal MN, Silva NR,
Monteiro AJ, Fernandes CA. The influence
of temporary cements on dental adhesive
systems for luting cementation. J Dent
2011;39:255-62.
23. Santos MJ, Bapoo H, Rizkalla AS, Santos GC.
Effect of dentin-cleaning techniques on the
shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin
luting cement to dentin. Oper Dent 2011;
36:512-20.
24. Soares C, Pereira J, Souza S, Menezes M,
Armstrong S. The effect of prophylaxis
method on microtensile bond strength of
indirect restorations to dentin. Oper Dent
2012;37:602-9.
25. Soares CJ, Castro CG, Santos Filho PC, da
Mota AS. Effect of previous treatments on
bond strength of two self-etching adhesive
systems to dental substrate. J Adhes Dent
2007;9:291-6.
26. Rosin C, Arana-Chavez VE, Netto NG,
Luz MA. Effects of cleaning agents on bond
strength to dentin. Braz Oral Res 2005;19:
127-33.
27. Nishimura K, Nikaido T, Foxton RM,
Tagami J. Effect of air-powder polishing on
dentin adhesion of a self-etching primer
bonding system. Dent Mater J 2005;24:
59-65.
Corresponding author:
Dr Frank Falkensammer
Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry
Sensengasse 2a, A-1090 Vienna
AUSTRIA
E-mail: frank.falkensammer@meduniwien.ac.at
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Cornelia Jungwirth for her
support in graphical designing of the publication
figures and graduated engineer Johannes
Bernreiter, Institute for Production Engineering
and Laser Technology, Technical University of
Vienna, for assistance in optical surface
measurements.
Copyright ª 2014 by the Editorial Council for
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.