Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:26:36.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ESEM Study of Dental Adhesive Polymerization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

V.M. Dusevich
Affiliation:
Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-, Kansas City, Mo, 64108, USA
J.D. Eick
Affiliation:
Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-, Kansas City, Mo, 64108, USA
Get access

Abstract

Dental adhesives are bonded to a wet surface of live tissue, dentin. There are two important stages of surface preparation for adhesive application: 1) Etching the tooth structure creating a layer of collagen network free from mineral, and 2) Applying a primer, in this case a water solution of hydrophilic monomer of 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (ScotchBond Multipurpose®, 3M). During the priming stage, the resin monomer should penetrate the fibril network and coat collagen fibrils. Subsequent adhesive resin penetration into the collagen network (hybrid layer) is not uniform, influenced by the presence of residual water and degree of resin polymerization. Dependence of bond strength of dental adhesives on time or intensity of light activation is well known, but no direct microscopic observations of the dynamics of polymerization were performed. This was due to the fact that during specimen dehydration for conventional SEM the polymerization process is still proceeding and residual monomer could be washed out.

Type
Advances in Imaging Techniques for Biomaterlals (Organized by S. Eppel)
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

references

1.Eick, J.D.et al., Rev. Oral. Biol. Med., (1997) 8(3):336356.Google Scholar
2.Toshio, Yanagawaet al., American J. of Dentistry, (1994), V.7, No.5: 157160.Google Scholar
3.Burrow, M.F.et al., J.Den.Res (1994), 73(2):522528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
This project was supported in part by NIDCR research grant DE09696 to the University of Missouri - Kansas City, School of Dentistry.Google Scholar