Previous studies on amalgam bonded restorations indicated that amalgam
bonding agents increased the bond strength of amalgam to tooth struct
ure. This in vitro study was designed to compare how the mode of curin
g and the presence of filler in the resin would affect the bond streng
th of amalgam. The five test groups of lining agents for amalgam resto
rations included Chemical-cured, Unfilled resin (CU-Clearfil New Bond)
; Light-cured, Unfilled resin with a delayed chemical-cure property (L
U-Clearfil Photo Bond); Light-cured, Filled resin with a delayed chem
ical-cure property (LF-Clearfil Photo Bond + Protect Liner); Dual-cur
ed, Unfilled resin (DU-All-Bond 2); and Varnish (V-Copalite). For each
group, 20 class 5 cavity preparations were cut on the facial, lingual
, or proximal surfaces of human molars, which were embedded in acrylic
resin. The preparations were 2.5 mm deep and 3 mm wide at the pulpal
floor with a slightly divergent taper. After treating the preparation
with the bonding agent, a 3/4-inch, 18-gauge flat-headed wire nail was
placed into the cavity with the head at the pulpal floor of the prepa
ration, and Tytin amalgam was then condensed into the preparation arou
nd the nail. The restorations were stored for 24 hours in distilled wa
ter at 37 degrees C and then subjected to 2500 thermal cycles (8 degre
es C to 48 degrees C). After 1 week, specimens were tested to failure
in tension using an Instron Universal Testing Machine (crosshead speed
= 2 mm/min) and peak load (kg) was recorded. The mean lends at failur
e (+/- SD) were LF 26.4 (+/- 7.0), DU 23.9 (+/- 6.4), LU* 16.0 (+/- 3
.1), CU 14.3 (+/- 8.0), and V 9.5 (+/- 5.6). Significant differences w
ere found using a one-way ANOVA and the Games and Howell post hoc test
at a significance level of alpha = 0.05. The LF and DU groups were n
ot significantly different from each other,but they were significantly
higher in peak load than all other groups. LU was significantly high
er than the varnish (V) but not significantly higher than CU. CU was n
ot significantly higher than the varnish (V). The adhesives forming a
thicker resin interface (the light-cured resin with filled resin liner
and the dual-cured unfilled resin) demonstrated significantly greater
retention than the light-cured unfilled resin, chemical-cured unfille
d resin, and the varnish control.