Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the microtensile bond strength of three adhesive systems, using different methods of dentin preparation. Materials and methods: A hundred and eight bovine teeth were used. The dentin from buccal face was exposed and prepared with three different methods, divided in 3 groups: Group 1 (DT)diamond tip on a high-speed handpiece; Group 2 (CVD)-CVD tip on a ultrasonic handpiece; Group 3 (LA)-Er: YAG laser. The teeth were divided into 3 subgroups, according

more »

... esive systems used: Subgroup 1-Adper Single Bond Plus/3M ESPE (SB) total-etch adhesive; Subgroup 2-Adper Scotchbond SE/3M ESPE (AS) selfetching adhesive; Subgroup 3-Clearfil SE Bond/Kuraray (CS) selfetching adhesive. Blocks of composite (Filtek Z250-3M ESPE) 4 mm high were built up and specimens were stored in deionized water for 24 hours at 37ºC. Serial mesiodistal and buccolingual cuts were made and stick-like specimens were obtained, with transversal section of 1.0 mm 2 . The samples were submitted to microtensile test at 1 mm/min and load of 10 kg in a universal testing machine. Data (MPa) were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey's tests (p < 0.05). Results and conclusion: Surface treatment with Diamond or CVD tips associated with Clearfil SE Bond adhesive produced significantly lower bond strength values compared to other groups. Surface treatment with Er: YAG laser associated with Single Bond Plus or Clearfil SE Bond adhesives and surface treatment with CVD tip associated with Adper Scotchbond SE adhesive produced significantly lower bond strength values compared to surface treatment with diamond or CVD tips associated with Single Bond Plus or Adper Scotchbond SE adhesives. Clinical significance: Interactions between laser and the CVD tip technologies and the different adhesive systems can produce a satisfactory bonding strength result, so that these associations may be beneficial and enhance the clinical outcomes.