dental materials 27 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 563–572 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.intl.elsevierhealth.com/journals/dema Resin–dentin bonds to EDTA-treated vs. acid-etched dentin using ethanol wet-bonding. Part II: Effects of mechanical cycling load on microtensile bond strengths Salvatore Sauro a,b,* , Manuel Toledano b , Fatima Sánchez Aguilera b , Francesco Mannocci a , David H. Pashley c , Franklin R. Tay d , Timothy F. Watson a , Raquel Osorio b a Biomaterials Science, Biomimetics & Biophotonics Research Group, King’s College London Dental Institute, Floor 17 Guy’s Hospital, London, UK b Dental Materials, School of Dentistry, University of Granada, Colegio Máximo, Campus de Cartuja, Granada, Spain c Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA d Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA article info Article history: Received 25 July 2010 Received in revised form 22 November 2010 Accepted 22 February 2011 Keywords: Microtensile bond strength Scanning electron microscopy Ethanol-saturated dentin Hydrophobic hybrid layer Cycling loading abstract Objective. To compare microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) subsequent to load cycling of resin bonded acid-etched or EDTA-treated dentin using a modified ethanol wet-bonding technique. Methods. Flat dentin surfaces were obtained from extracted human molars and conditioned using 37% H 3 PO 4 (PA) (15 s) or 0.1 M EDTA (60 s). Five experimental adhesives and one com- mercial bonding agent were applied to the dentin and light-cured. Solvated experimental resins (50% ethanol/50% comonomers) were used as primers and their respective neat resins were used as the adhesives. The resin-bonded teeth were stored in distilled water (24h) or submitted to 5000 loading cycles of 90 N. The bonded teeth were then sectioned in beams for MTBS. Modes of failure were examined by scanning electron microscopy. Results. The most hydrophobic resin 1 gave the lowest bond strength values to both acid and EDTA-treated dentin. The hydrophobic resin 2 applied to EDTA-treated dentin showed lower bond strengths after cycling load but this did not occur when it was bonded to PA-etched dentin. Resins 3 and 4, which contained hydrophilic monomers, gave higher bond strengths to both EDTA-treated or acid-etched dentin and showed no significant difference after load cycling. The most hydrophilic resin 5 showed no significant difference in bond strengths after cycling loading when bonded to EDTA or phosphoric acid treated dentin but exhibited low bond strengths. Significance. The presence of different functional monomers influences the MTBS of the adhe- sive systems when submitted to cyclic loads. Adhesives containing hydrophilic comonomers are not affected by cycling load challenge especially when applied on EDTA-treated dentin followed by ethanol wet bonding. © 2011 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. ∗ Corresponding author at: Dental Biomaterials Science, King’s College London Dental Institute, Floor 17 Guy’s Tower, London SE1 9RT, England, UK. Tel.: +44 0207 188 3874; fax: +44 0207 188 1823. E-mail address: salvatore.sauro@kcl.ac.uk (S. Sauro). 0109-5641/$ – see front matter © 2011 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.02.010