Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Dental adhesion with resin composites: a review and clinical tips for best practice

Abstract

Modern restorative dentistry would not be possible without the ability to bond to tooth structure. The development of dental adhesives has a lengthy gestation, from the beginnings around 1950, to the latest generation: modern universal adhesives, which were introduced during the 2010s. The foundation for these developments was a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of adhesion to the tooth structure, and to restoration materials. Typically, the performance of an adhesive does not depend on the use of a single ingredient, but on an overall balanced and optimised formulation that contains various components with different roles, such as functional adhesive monomers.

While a wealth of literature exists on adhesives that have a long and successful clinical history ('gold standards'), some universal adhesives have also accumulated a lot of scientific evidence while offering benefits like ease of use, low technique sensitivity and versatility.

To achieve reliable results with a modern adhesive, several tips should be kept in mind regardless of the product, which result in a homogeneous adhesive layer, proper cure and ultimately high bond strength. Although high performance is already achieved with the adhesives currently available, this is still an exciting area of ongoing research.

Key points

  • Explains history and different classifications of contemporary adhesives, and modes of interaction with enamel, dentine and restoration materials.

  • Provides information on selecting an adhesive and tips for successful clinical application. Special attention is required for proper solvent evaporation, creation of a homogeneous adhesive layer and thorough light curing.

  • While current and future developments include useful features like radiopacity or improved bond strength, caution should be used around products promising faster and easier application, or 'bioactivity'. Minimally invasive procedures may open up alternatives to conventional preparation and filling techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Black G V. Cavity preparation. Volume II. The technical procedures in filling teeth. In A Work on Operative Dentistry in Two Volumes. pp 110-111. Chicago: Medico-Dental Publishing Co., 1908.

  2. Webb M H. Notes on Operative Dentistry. Philadelphia: SS White, 1883.

  3. Black G V. Management of enamel margins. Dent Cosmos 1891; 33: 85-100.

  4. Schwendicke F, Frencken J E, Bjørndal L et al. Managing Carious Lesions: Consensus Recommendations on Carious Tissue Removal. Adv Dent Res 2016; 28: 58-67.

  5. Burke F J T. From extension for prevention to prevention of extension: (Minimal intervention dentistry). Dent Update 2003; 30: 492-502.

  6. McLean J W. The pioneers of enamel and dentin bonding. J Adhes Dent 1999; 1: 185-187.

  7. Söderholm K-J M. Dental adhesives….How it all started and later evolved. J Adhes Dent 2007; 9: 227-230.

  8. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Van Landuyt K, Yoshida Y, Peumans M. From Buonocore's pioneering acid-etch technique to self-adhering restoratives. A status perspective of rapidly advancing dental adhesive technology. J Adhes Dent 2020; 22: 7-34.

  9. Sebold M, Bosso André C, Ometto Sahadi B, Breschi L, Giannini M. Chronological history and current advancements of dental adhesive systems development: a narrative review. J Adhes Sci Technol 2020; DOI: 10.1080/01694243.2020.1865611.

  10. Hagger O. Swiss Patent 278946. 1949.

  11. Buonocore M G. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955; 34: 849-853.

  12. Fusayama T, Nakamura M, Kurosaki N, Iwaku M. Non-pressure adhesion of a new adhesive restorative resin. J Dent Res 1979; 58: 1364-1370.

  13. Nakabayashi N, Kojima K, Masuhara E. The promotion of adhesion by the infiltration of monomers into tooth substrates. J Biomed Mater Res 1982; 16: 265-273.

  14. Perdigao J, Hodges J S, Geraldeli S, Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: Effect on postoperative sensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134: 1621-1629.

  15. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K L. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 17-28.

  16. Wang Y, Spencer P. Continuing etching of an all-in-one adhesive in wet dentin tubules. J Dent Res 2005; 84: 350-354.

  17. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M et al. critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 2005; 84: 118-132.

  18. Sezinando A. Looking for the ideal adhesive - a review. Rev Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxillofac 2014; 55: 194-206.

  19. Lawson N C, Robles A, Fu C-C, Lin C P, Sawlani K, Burgess J O. Two-year clinical trial of a universal adhesive in total-etch and self-etch mode in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 2015; 43: 1229-1234.

  20. Loguercio A D, De Paula E A, Hass V, Luque-Martinez I, Reis A, Perdigao J. A new universal simplified adhesive: 36-month randomized double-blind clinical trial. J Dent 2015; 43: 1083-1092.

  21. Haak R, Hähnel M, Schneider H et al. Clinical and OCT outcomes of a universal adhesive in a randomized clinical trial after 12 months. J Dent 2019; 90: 103200.

  22. Burke F J T, Crisp R J, Cowan A J et al. Randomized controlled trial of a universal bonding agent at three years: self-etch vs total etch. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017; 25: 220-227.

  23. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 2010; DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.148.

  24. Raux F. L'adhésion en 2019. Inf Dent 2019; 25: 20-23.

  25. Kanca 3rd J. Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 1992; 23: 39-41.

  26. Perdigao J, Sezinando A, Monteiro P C. Laboratory bonding ability of a multi-purpose dentin adhesive. Am J Dent 2012; 25: 153-158.

  27. Mazzoni A, Tjäderhane L, Checchi V et al. Role of dentin MMPs in caries progression and bond stability. J Dent Res 2015; 94: 241-251.

  28. Van Landuyt K L, Snauwaert J, De Munck J et al. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 2007; 28: 3757-3785.

  29. Hiraishi N, Breschi L, Prati C, Ferrari M, Tagami J, King N M. Technique sensitivity associated with air-drying of HEMA-free, single-bottle, one-step self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 498-505.

  30. Özcan M, Bernasconi M. Adhesion to zirconia used for dental restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17: 7-26.

  31. Comino-Garayoa R, Peláez J, Tobar C, Rodríguez V, Suárez M J. Adhesion to zirconia: a systematic review of surface pretreatments and resin cements. Materials 2021; 14: 2751.

  32. Yang B, Lange-Jansen H C, Scharnberg M et al. Influence of saliva contamination on zirconia ceramic bonding. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 508-513.

  33. Takahashi A, Takagaki T, Wada T, Uo M, Nikaido T, Tagami J. The effect of different cleaning agents on saliva contamination for bonding performance of zirconia ceramics. Dent Mater J 2018;37: 734-739.

  34. Kern M. Bonding to oxide ceramics - Laboratory testing versus clinical outcome. Dent Mater 2015; 31: 8-14.

  35. Loomans B A C, Özcan M. Intraoral repair of direct and indirect restorations: Procedures and guidelines. Oper Dent 2016; DOI: 10.2341/15-269-LIT.

  36. Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N, Sonoda A et al. Effectiveness and stability of silane coupling agent incorporated in 'universal' adhesives. Dent Mater 2016; 32: 1218-1225.

  37. Yao C, Ahmed M H, De Grave L et al. Optimizing glass-ceramic bonding incorporating new silane technology in an experimental universal adhesive formulation. Dent Mater 2021; 37: 894-904.

  38. Staxrud F, Dahl J E. Silanising agents promote resin-composite repair. Int Dent J 2015; 65: 311-315.

  39. Fornazari I A, Wille I, Meda E M, Brum R T, Souza E M. Effect of surface treatment, silane, and universal adhesive on microshear bond strength of nanofilled composite repairs. Oper Dent 2017; 42: 367-374.

  40. D'Arcangelo C, Vanini L, Prosperi G D et al. The influence of adhesive thickness on the microtensile bond strength of three adhesive systems. J Adhes Dent 2009; 11: 109-115.

  41. Roulet J-F, Price R B. Light curing - guidelines for practitioners. A consensus statement from the 2014 symposium on light curing in dentistry held at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. J Adhes Dent 2014; 16: 303-304.

  42. Santschi K, Peutzfeld A, Lussi A, Flury S. Effect of salivary contamination and decontamination on bond strength of two one-step self-etching adhesives to dentin of primary and permanent teeth. J Adhes Dent 2015; 17: 51-57.

  43. Nair P, Hickel R, Ilie N. Adverse effects of salivary contamination for adhesives in restorative dentistry. A literature review. Am J Dent 2017; 30: 156-164.

  44. Saikaew P, Matsumoto M, Chowdhury A, Carvalho R M, Sano H. Does shortened application time affect long-term bond strength of universal adhesives to dentin? Oper Dent 2018; 43: 549-558.

  45. Loguercio A D, Muñoz M A, Luque-Martinez I, Hass V, Reis A, Perdigao J. Does active application of universal adhesives to enamel in self-etch mode improve their performance? J Dent 2015; 43: 1060-1070.

  46. Mine A, De Munck J, Van Ende A et al. Limited interaction of a self-adhesive flowable composite with dentin/enamel characterized by TEM. Dent Mater 2017; 33: 209-217.

  47. Poitevin A, De Munck J, Van Ende A et al. Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive composites to dentin and enamel. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 221-230.

  48. Frankenberger R, Dudek M-C, Winter J et al. Amalgam alternatives critically evaluated: Effect of long-term thermomechanical loading on marginal quality, wear, and fracture behaviour. J Adhes Dent 2020; 22: 107-116.

  49. Frencken J E, Coelho Leal S, Navarro M F. Twenty-five-year atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach: a comprehensive overview. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16: 1337-1346.

  50. Maciel Pires P, De Almeida Neves A, Makeeva I M et al. Contemporary restorative ion-releasing materials: current status, interfacial properties and operative approaches. Br Dent J 2020; 229: 450-458.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Prof Mario de Goes, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil, for providing the photograph for Figure 4; Prof Graham Chadwick, University of Dundee, UK, for the opportunity to publish this paper and guidance in preparing the manuscript; and 3M Company for the permission to write this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Dr Christoph Thalacker has a PhD in organic chemistry from the University of Ulm, Germany. Since 2010, he is responsible for the development of dental adhesives at 3M Oral Care, Seefeld, Germany. He conducted the literature search and wrote this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph Thalacker.

Ethics declarations

The author is a full-time employee of 3M Deutschland GmbH.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thalacker, C. Dental adhesion with resin composites: a review and clinical tips for best practice. Br Dent J 232, 615–619 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-022-4144-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-022-4144-7

Search

Quick links