Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of universal composite with three different liners: an in-vitro study

AIM. The study was intended to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of universal composite with three different liners and two different adhesive systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty maxillary premolar teeth with 3mm diameter and 2 mm depth cavities were prepared and categorized into 3 groups of twenty each. Each group was filled with the respective liners Group I: Biodentine; Group II: Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC); Group III: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). Each group had two subgroups according to the adhesive system used: Group A (Prime & Bond, universal adhesive) and Group B (Te-Econom Bonding agent). A split teflon mould was used to build a composite resin of dimensions 2 mm in diameter and 4 mm in depth, and light-cured. The SBS was determined by utilising a knife-edge blade in a universal testing machine, and fractured surfaces were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope.

RESULTS. The findings revealed that RMGIC achieved adequate SBS to universal composite and showed a mixed mode of failure compared to other groups. Applying a self-etch adhesive (Prime & Bond) between RMGIC and universal composite resin significantly enhances SBS as opposed to a total-etch adhesive (Te-ECONOM). Whereas Biodentine and MTA exhibited lower SBS when immediately bonded to the universal composite.

CONCLUSIONS. Based on the findings of this study, RMGIC is established as an optimal material for indirect pulp capping in clinical practice, and Biodentine and MTA are ideal for vital pulp therapy in cases of pulp exposure, with Biodentine yielding superior results.

1. Abarajithan M., Velmurugan N., Kandaswamy D. Management of recently traumatized maxillary central incisors by partial pulpotomy using MTA: Case reports with two-year follow-up. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(2):110–113. Available at: https://www.ovid.com/jnls/jcde/fulltext/10.4103/0972-0707.66724~management-of-recently-traumatized-maxillary-central (accessed: 27.02.2026).

2. Hamilton A.R., Ricketts D. Management of deep caries. Br Dent J. 2026;240(5):357–364. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-025-9350-7

3. Ghoddusi J., Forghani M., Parisay I. New approaches in vital pulp therapy in permanent teeth. Iran Endod J. 2014;9(1):15–22. https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v9i1.4862

4. Islam R., Islam M.R.R., Tanaka T., Alam M.K., Ahmed H.M.A., Sano H. Direct pulp capping procedures – Evidence and practice. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2023;59:48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdsr.2023.02.002

5. Drouri S., El Merini H., Sy A., Jabri M. Evaluation of direct and indirect pulp capping with Biodentine in vital permanent teeth with deep caries lesions. Cureus. 2023;15(5):e39374. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39374

6. Alomran W.K., Nizami M.Z.I., Xu H.H.K., Sun J. Evolution of dental resin adhesives – A comprehensive review. J Funct Biomater. 2025;16(3):104. https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb16030104

7. Muliyar S., Shameem K.A., Thankachan R.P., Francis P.G., Jayapalan C.S., Hafiz K.A. Microleakage in endodontics. J Int Oral Health. 2014;6(6):99–104. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4295468/pdf/JIOH-6-99.pdf (accessed: 27.02.2026).

8. Kunert M., Lukomska-Szymanska M. Bio-inductive materials in direct and indirect pulp capping – A review article. Materials. 2020;13(5):1204. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13051204

9. Kaur M., Singh H., Dhillon J.S., Batra M., Saini M. MTA versus Biodentine: Review of literature with a comparative analysis. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(8):ZG01–ZG05. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/25840.10374

10. El Mourad A.M. Assessment of bonding effectiveness of adhesive materials to tooth structure using bond strength test methods: A review of literature. Open Dent J. 2018;12:664–678. https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901814010664

11. Potiprapanpong W., Naruphontjirakul P., Khamsuk C., Channasanon S., Toneluck A., Tanodekaew S. et al. Assessment of mechanical/chemical properties and cytotoxicity of resin-modified glass ionomer cements containing Sr/F-Bioactive glass nanoparticles and methacrylate functionalized polyacids. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(12):10231. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241210231

12. Samman M., Barakat O., Fares H. Bonding ability of different liners to bulk-fill resin composite using silanecontaining adhesive. Egypt Dent J. 2017;63:2905–2913.

13. Deepa V.L., Dhamaraju B., Bollu I.P., Balaji T.S. Shear bond strength evaluation of resin composite bonded to three different liners: TheraCal LC, Biodentine, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement using universal adhesive: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2016;19(2):166–70. Available at: https://www.ovid.com/jnls/jcde/fulltext/10.4103/0972-0707.178696~shear-bond-strength-evaluation-of-resin-composite-bonded-to (accessed: 27.02.2026).

14. Odabaş M.E., Bani M., Tirali R.E. Shear bond strengths of different adhesive systems to Biodentine. Scientific World Journal. 2013;2013:626103. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/626103

15. Gjorgievska E.S., Nicholson J.W., Apostolska S.M., Coleman N.J., Booth S.E., Slipper I.J., Mladenov M.I. Interfacial properties of three different bioactive dentine substitutes. Microsc Microanal. 2013;19(6):1450–1457. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927613013573

16. Camilleri J. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of the material interface of adjacent layers of dental materials. Dent Mater. 2011;27(9):870–878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.013

17. Celiksoz O., Irmak O. Delayed vs. immediate placement of restorative materials over Biodentine and RetroMTA: a micro-shear bond strength study. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):130. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-03917-3

18. Schmidt A., Schäfer E., Dammaschke T. Shear bond strength of lining materials to calcium-silicate cements at different time intervals. J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(2):129–135. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a38100

19. Altunsoy M., Tanrıver M., Ok E., Kucukyilmaz E. Shear bond strength of a self-adhering flowable composite and a flowable base composite to mineral trioxide aggregate, calcium-enriched mixture cement, and Biodentine. J Endod. 2015;41(10):1691–1695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.06.013

20. Arora V., Kundabala M., Parolia A., Thomas M.S., Pai V. Comparison of the shear bond strength of RMGIC to a resin composite using different adhesive systems: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(2):80–83. Available at: https://www.ovid.com/jnls/jcde/fulltext/10.4103/0972-0707.66716~comparison-of-the-shear-bond-strength-of-rmgic-to-a-resin (accessed: 27.02.2026).

21. Mount G.J. The wettability of bonding resins used in the composite resin/glass ionomer “sandwich technique”. Aust Dent J. 1989;34(1):32–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.1989.tb03002.x

22. Boruziniat A., Gharaei S. Bond strength between composite resin and resin modified glass ionomer using different adhesive systems and curing techniques. J Conserv Dent. 2014;17(2):150–154. Available at: https://www.ovid.com/jnls/jcde/fulltext/10.4103/0972-0707.128055~bond-strength-between-composite-resin-and-resin-modified (accessed: 27.02.2026).

23. Shin J.H., Jang J.H., Park S.H., Kim E. Effect of mineral trioxide aggregate surface treatments on morphology and bond strength to composite resin. J Endod. 2014;40(8):1210–1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.01.027

24. Yelamali S., Patil A.C. “Evaluation of shear bond strength of a composite resin to white mineral trioxide aggregate with three different bonding systems” – An in vitro analysis. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016;8(3):e273–e277. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.52727

25. Kayahan M.B., Nekoofar M.H., Kazandağ M., Canpolat C., Malkondu O., Kaptan F., Dummer P.M. Effect of acid-etching procedure on selected physical properties of mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J. 2009;42(11):1004–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01610.x

26. Nekoofar M.H., Motevasselian F., Mirzaei M., Yassini E., Pouyanfar H., Dummer P.M. The micro-shear bond strength of various resinous restorative materials to aged Biodentine. Iran Endod J. 2018;13(3):356–361. https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v13i3.20880