scholarly journals Microleakage and Marginal Gap of Adhesive Cements for Noble Alloy Full Cast Crowns

2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Hooshmand ◽  
M Mohajerfar ◽  
A Keshvad ◽  
P Motahhary
Keyword(s):  
Nitrate Solution ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Adhesive Luting ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement

SUMMARY Very limited comparative information about the microleakage in noble alloy full cast crowns luted with different types of adhesive resin cements is available. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microleakage and marginal gap of two self-adhesive resin cements with that of other types of adhesive luting cements for noble alloy full cast crowns. Fifty noncarious human premolars and molars were prepared in a standardized manner for full cast crown restorations. Crowns were made from a noble alloy using a standardized technique and randomly cemented with five cementing agents as follows: 1) GC Fuji Plus resin-modified glass ionomer cement, 2) Panavia F 2.0 resin cement, 3) Multilink Sprint self-adhesive resin cement, 4), Rely X Unicem self-adhesive resin cement with pretreatment, and 5) Rely X Unicem with no pretreatment. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for two weeks and then subjected to thermocycling. They were then placed in a silver nitrate solution, vertically cut in a mesiodistal direction and evaluated for microleakage and marginal gap using a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using a nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn multiple range test at a p<0.05 level of significance. The Rely X Unicem (with or with no pretreatment) exhibited the smallest degree of microleakage at both tooth-cement and cement-crown interfaces. The greatest amount of microleakage was found for Panavia F 2.0 resin cement followed by GC Fuji Plus at both interfaces. No statistically significant difference in the marginal gap values was found between the cementing agents evaluated (p>0.05). The self-adhesive resin cements provided a much better marginal seal for the noble alloy full cast crowns compared with the resin-modified glass ionomer or dual-cured resin-based cements.

Development of a Cavity Disinfectant Containing Antibacterial Monomer MDPB

2016 ◽  
Vol 95 (13) ◽  
pp. 1487-1493 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Hirose ◽  
R. Kitagawa ◽  
H. Kitagawa ◽  
H. Maezono ◽  
A. Mine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibacterial Activity ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Bacterial Species ◽  
Oral Bacteria ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement

An experimental cavity disinfectant (ACC) that is intended to be used for various direct and indirect restorations was prepared by adding an antibacterial monomer 12-methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinum bromide (MDPB) at 5% into 80% ethanol. The antibacterial effectiveness of ACC and its influences on the bonding abilities of resin cements were investigated. To examine the antibacterial activity of unpolymerized MDPB, the minimum inhibitory and bactericidal concentrations (MIC and MBC) were determined for Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus casei, Actinomyces naeslundii, Parvimonas micra, Enterococcus faecalis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Porphyromonas gingivalis. Antibacterial activities of ACC and the commercial cavity disinfectant containing 2% chlorhexidine and ethanol (CPS) were evaluated by agar disk diffusion tests through 7 bacterial species and by MIC and MBC measurement for S. mutans. The effects of ACC and CPS to kill bacteria in dentinal tubules were compared with an S. mutans–infected dentin model. Shear bond strength tests were used to examine the influences of ACC on the dentin-bonding abilities of a self-adhesive resin cement and a dual-cure resin cement used with a primer. Unpolymerized MDPB showed strong antibacterial activity against 7 oral bacteria. ACC produced inhibition zones against all bacterial species similar to CPS. For ACC and CPS, the MIC value for S. mutans was identical, and the MBC was similar with only a 1-step dilution difference (1:2). Treatment of infected dentin with ACC resulted in significantly greater bactericidal effects than CPS ( P < 0.05, analysis of variance and Tukey’s honest significant difference test). ACC showed no negative influences on the bonding abilities to dentin for both resin cements, while CPS reduced the bond strength of the self-adhesive resin cement ( P < 0.05). This study clarified that the experimental cavity disinfectant containing 5% MDPB is more effective in vitro than the commercially available chlorhexidine solution to eradicate bacteria in dentin, without causing any adverse influences on the bonding abilities of resinous luting cements.

Simulated Wear of Self-Adhesive Resin Cements

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Takamizawa ◽  
WW Barkmeier ◽  
MA Latta ◽  
TP Berry ◽  
A Tsujimoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Gap Model ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Wear Model ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Luting Agents ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Worn Surfaces

SUMMARY One of the primary areas of concern with luting agents is marginal gap erosion and attrition. The purpose of this laboratory study was to evaluate bulk and marginal slit (gap) generalized wear of self-adhesive resin cements. Three self-adhesive resin cements were used in this study: G-CEM LinkAce (LA), Maxcem Elite (ME), and RelyX Unicem2 Automix (RU). A custom stainless-steel fixture with a cavity 4.5 mm in diameter and 4 mm deep was used for simulated generalized (bulk) wear. For simulated marginal gap wear, a two-piece stainless-steel custom fixture was designed with a slit (gap) 300 μm wide and 3 mm in length. For both wear models, 20 specimens each for each of the three adhesive cements were made for both light-cure and chemical-cure techniques. The cured cements were polished with a series of carbide papers to a 4000-grit surface and subjected to 100,000 cycles using the slit (gap) wear model and 400,000 cycles for generalized (bulk) wear in a Leinfelder-Suzuki (Alabama machine) wear simulator (maximum load of 78.5 N). Flat-ended stainless-steel antagonists were used in a water slurry of poly(methylmethacrylate) beads for simulation of generalized contact-free area wear with both wear models. Before and after the wear challenges, the specimens were profiled with a Proscan 2100 noncontact profilometer, and wear (volume loss [VL] and mean facet depth [FD]) was determined using AnSur 3D software. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc tests were used for data analysis for the two wear models. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to examine polished surfaces of the resin cements and the worn surfaces after the wear challenges. The two-way ANOVA of VL using the generalized (bulk) wear model showed a significant effect among the three resin cement materials for the factor of resin cement (p&lt;0.001) and the interaction of the cement and cure method (p&lt;0.001), but not for the cure method (p=0.465). The two-way ANOVA for FD also found a significant difference for the factor of resin cement (p&lt;0.001) and the interaction of the resin cement and cure method (p&lt;0.001), but not for the cure method (p=0.277). The simulated generalized (bulk) wear for the light-cure groups was as follows: VL (mm3): RU 0.631 (0.094), LA 0.692 (0.112), and ME 1.046 (0.141) and FD (μm): RU 43.6 (6.5), LA 47.0 (7.7), and ME 72.5 (9.9). The simulated generalized (bulk) wear for the chemical-cure groups was as follows: VL (mm3): LA 0.741 (0.105), RU 1.231 (0.234), and ME 1.305 (0.143) and FD (μm): LA 50.7 (7.2), RU 84.5 (16.1), and ME 91.7 (10.2). Simulated wear using the slit (gap) model for the light-cure groups was as follows: VL (mm3): RU 0.030 (0.006), LA 0.031 (0.006), and ME 0.041 (0.009) and FD (μm): RU 49.6 (5.7), LA 57.2 (8.4), and ME 70.9 (10.7). The wear values for the chemical-cure slit (gap) groups were as follows: VL (mm3): LA 0.031 (0.004), ME 0.038 (0.007), and RU 0.045 (0.009) and FD (μm): LA 53.9 (6.7), ME 63.5 (9.1), and RU 74.2 (12.9). Pearson correlation tests revealed a strong relationship between the two wear models for the light-cure groups and a good relationship for the chemical-cure groups. The observations using SEM showed differences in filler particle shape and size among the cements and the resultant effect of the wear challenges. The worn surfaces of each cement were essentially the same for both light-cure and chemical-cure methods. The bulk wear model and new slit (gap) model for evaluation of simulated generalized wear of luting agents demonstrated significant differences (p&lt;0.05) in relative wear among three self-adhesive resin cements and between visible light- and chemical-cure techniques.

scholarly journals Comparative Analysis of Postcementation Hypersensitivity with Glass Ionomer Cement and a Resin Cement: An in vivo Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepak Mehta ◽  
Rohit M Shetty ◽  
Sonia Bhat ◽  
G Srivatsa ◽  
Y Bharath Shetty
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Abutment Teeth ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity ◽  
Ionomer Cement

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of this clinical study was to compare the postoperative sensitivity of abutment teeth restored with full coverage restorations retained with either conventional glassionomer cement (GIC) or resin cement. Materials and methods Fifty patients received full-coverage restorations on vital abutment teeth. Of these, 25 were cemented with GIC (GC Luting and Lining cement) and the other 25 using an adhesive resin cement (Smartcem 2). A randomized single blind study was undertaken for acquiring and evaluating the data. The teeth were examined before cementation, after cementation, 24 hours postcementation and 7 days postcementation. A visual analog scale was used to help the patient rate hypersensitivity. Results The statistical analysis of the result was done using students paired t-test. No statistically significant difference between Smartcem 2 and GIC was observed, when tested immediately and 24 hours after cementation. Statistically significant difference was seen between Smartcem 2 and GIC when tested 7 days postcementation with a significance level of 0.05. Higher postoperative sensitivity was seen with GIC when compared to resin cement. Conclusion In this study, the incidence of postoperative hypersensitivity after cementation of full-crown restorations with GIC and resin cement was similar when tested immediately. However, 7 days postcementation, abutments with GIC showed higher response compared to resin cement. Clinical significance A self-adhesive resin cement can be the material of choice for luting if presence of postoperative sensitivity is of prime consideration. In case GIC is being used, patient should be informed about the presence of sensitivity for a more prolonged period than with resin cement. How to cite this article Shetty RM, Bhat S, Mehta D, Srivatsa G, Shetty YB. Comparative Analysis of Postcementation Hypersensitivity with Glass Ionomer Cement and a Resin Cement: An in vivo Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(3): 327-331.

scholarly journals COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH AND FAILURE MODES OF FIBER POST CEMENTED WITH DIFFERENT ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS: AN IN-VITRO STUDY

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Sonali Bansod ◽  
Ashwini Gaikwad ◽  
Abhijit Jadhav
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Fiber Post ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Push Out

Aim: To compare the push-out bond strength and modes of failure of fiber post cemented with different adhesive resin cements. Materials and Method: Forty five single rooted teeth were randomly divided into three groups as, group 1- Fluorocore 2+, group 2- Rely-X U200 and group 3-G-Cem, according to the adhesive resin cement used. The roots were subjected to chemo-mechanical preparation and cemented with adhesive resin cement. The teeth were sectioned into slices of the different root thirds and tested for bond strength (push out). Results were analysed using Chi square, Mann Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis test was used to find the significance of study parameters between three or more groups, with p = 0.05 for statistical significance. Result: Push out bond strength of Fluorocore 2+ is significantly higher at coronal level than apical level. No significant difference observed between coronal, middle and apical levels in group 2 and in group 3. Conclusion: Fluorocore 2+ adhesive resin cement is best to use for luting the fibre post. Fluorocore 2+ forms better bonding with post as well as dentin proving its better efficiency clinically.

scholarly journals Influence of Surface Treatment and Resin Cements on the Bond Strength between the Y-TZP Zirconia and Composite Resin Interface

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 477-482
Author(s):  
Lucas Campagnaro Maciel ◽  
Amanda Pádua Proeza ◽  
Hélyda Coelho Guimarães Balbino ◽  
Marcela Moráo Corteletti ◽  
Ricardo Huver De Jesus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
The Self ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement

AbstractThe evolution of dental materials and the improvement of ceramic systems stimulated the increased use of Y-TZP zirconia-based ceramics. Despite the excellent mechanical performance, this material has low adhesion potential. The objective of this work was to evaluate the surface treatments and resin cements influence on bond strength between Y-TZP zirconia and composite resin interface. A total of 60 blocks of Y-TZP zirconia (3x8x8mm) were prepared and divided into 3 groups according to the surface treatments: (C) control - extra fine diamond bur, (J) sandblasting with Al2O3 and (JP) sandblasting with Al2O3 + ceramic primer. Each group was subdivided into two groups according to type of resin cement used for cementing composite resin discs (2mm thick x 5mm diameter): self-adhesive and conventional (n=10). The samples were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37±1°C in a incubator and subsequently submitted to the shear bond test to determine the bond strength (RU). There was no significant difference in RU among the  surface treatments when using conventional resin cement. For the self-adhesive resin cement, Al2O3 blasting and Al2O3 + primer blasting increased the RU but did not present significant differences between them (p<0.05). Comparing the cements, it was observed that regardless of the surface treatment, the highest values were for the self-adhesive resin cement (p<0.05). Application of the primer after blasting with Al2O3 did not increase RU. Keywords: Dental Prosthesis. Ceramics. Dental cements. Shear Strength.  ResumoA evolução dos materiais odontológicos e o aprimoramento dos sistemas cerâmicos impulsionaram o aumento da utilização da cerâmica a base de zircônia Y-TZP. Apesar do excelente desempenho mecânico, este material apresenta baixo potencial de adesão. O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a influência dos tratamentos de superfícies e dos cimentos resinosos na resistência de união entre a interface zircônia Y-TZP e resina composta. Foram confeccionados 60 blocos de zircônia Y-TZP (3x8x8 mm) e divididos em 03 grupos de acordo com os tratamentos de superfícies que receberam: (C) controle - ponta diamantada extrafina, (J) jateamento com Al2O3 e (JP) jateamento com Al2O3 + primer cerâmico. Cada grupo foi subdividido em dois novos grupos de acordo com tipo de cimento resinoso utilizado para cimentação de discos de resina composta (2mm de espessura x 5mm de diâmetro): autoadesivo e resinoso convencional (n=10). As amostras foram armazenadas em água destilada por 24 horas a 37±1°C em estufa e posteriormente submetidas ao teste de cisalhamento para averiguar a resistência de união (RU). Não houve diferença significativa na RU entre os tratamentos de superfície quando utilizado o cimento resinoso convencional. Para o cimento resinoso autoadesivo o jateamento com Al2O3 e o jateamento de Al2O3 + primer aumentaram a RU porém não apresentaram diferenças significativas entre si (p<0,05). Comparando os cimentos observou-se que, independente do tratamento de superfície, os maiores valores foram para o cimento resinoso autoadesivo (p<0,05). A aplicação do primer após o jateamento com Al2O3 não proporcionou aumento da RU. Palavras-chave: Prótese Dentária. Cerâmica. Cimentos Dentários. Resistência ao Cisalhamento.

scholarly journals Nanoleakage for Self-Adhesive Resin Cements used in Bonding CAD/CAD Ceramic Material to Dentin

2011 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 281-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wafa El-Badrawy ◽  
Randa Mohamed Hafez ◽  
Abeer Ibrahim Abo El Naga ◽  
Doaa Ragai Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Nitrate Solution ◽  
Silver Nitrate Solution ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Nail Polish ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Ceramic Blocks ◽  
Post Hoc

ABSTRACTObjectives: To determine nanoleakage of CAD/CAM ceramic blocks bonded to dentin with selfadhesive resin cement. Methods: Eighteen sound extracted human molars were sterilized and sectioned into 3 mm-thick dentin sections. Trilux Cerec Vitablocks (Vita) were also sectioned into 3 mm sections, surfacetreated using 5% hydrofluoric acid-etchant, and then coated with silane primer (Vita). Trilux and dentin sections were cemented together by means of three resin cements: Rely-X Unicem (3M/ ESPE), BisCem (Bisco), and Calibra (Dentsply), according to manufacturers' recommendations. Calibra was used in conjunction with Prime/Bond-NT adhesive (Dentsply), while the other two are self-adhesive. The bonded specimens were stored for 24h in distilled water at 37°C. Specimens were vertically sectioned into 1 mm- thick slabs, yielding up to six per specimen. Two central slabs were randomly chosen from each specimen making up the cement groups (n=12). Each group was subdivided into two subgroups (n=6), a control and a thermocycled subgroup (5-55°C) for 500 cycles. Slabs were coated with nail polish up to 1 mm from the interface, immersed in a 50% silver nitrate solution for 24h, and tested for nanoleakage using Quanta Environmental SEM and EDAX. Data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests. Results: Rely-X Unicem and Calibra groups demonstrated no significant difference in the percentage of silver penetration, while the BisCem group revealed a significantly higher percentage (P≤.05). Thermocycling (500 cycles) did not have a statistically significant effect on the percentage of silver penetration (P>.05). Conclusions: One self-adhesive-resin cement demonstrated a similar sealing ability when compared with a standard resin cement. Thermo-cycling did not significantly increase dye penetration under the test conditions. (Eur J Dent 2011;5:281-290)

scholarly journals Effect of luting agent on the bond strength of ceramic-based lithium disilicate and titanium abutment subjected to artificial aging

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Washington Reis Leite ◽  
Paulo Henrique De Souza Pereira ◽  
Laís Regiane Da Silva Concílio
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Luting Agent ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement

This study aimed to evaluate the bond strength (BS) of a ceramic coping-abutment implant interface according to the luting agent, before and after thermal cycling (TC). Methodology: Forty ceramic copings and abutments (Ti) were divided into four groups (n=10): OZ (zinc oxide eugenol free), PZ (zinc phosphate), GIC (resin modified glass ionomer), and RC (adhesive resin cement). BS test was performed using a universal testing machine before and after TC. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test (p<0.05) were performed for the means. Results: The results showed that before TC, the values ranged from 50.77 N (OZ) to 240.21 N (GIC). After TC, the values showed intermediate results - 3.5 N (OZ) and 330.66 N (RC), 90.58 N (PZ), and 280.43 N (GIC). OZ performed the worst, both before and after TC. Before TC, GIC had the highest value. After TC, RC had the highest value of BS. Conclusions: The aging process influenced and inverted the results of the GIC and RC groups, and had a greater negative impact on the OZ group.

Marginal Fit and Retention Strength of Zirconia Crowns Cemented by Self-adhesive Resin Cements

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Pilo ◽  
M Folkman ◽  
A Arieli ◽  
S Levartovsky
Keyword(s):  
Resin Cement ◽  
Image Analysis System ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Zirconia Crowns ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Analysis System ◽  
Panavia 21

SUMMARY The absolute marginal gap (AMG) precementation and postcementation and the retention of zirconia crowns cemented to standardized molar preparations (4×10) by self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) were evaluated. The following SARCs were used: RelyX U-200 (RXU200; 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany), SmartCem 2 (SC2; Dentsply, Milford, DE, USA), and G-Cem Automix (GCA; GC, Alsip, IL, USA). The control adhesive resin cement was Panavia 21 (PAN; Kuraray Dental Co Ltd, Osaka, Japan). Twenty measuring locations at a constant interval along the margins were marked, and the AMG was measured by an image analysis system connected to a stereomicroscope (20×). The cemented copings were aged 270 days at 100% humidity and 37°C and then underwent 10,000 thermal cycles, 5°C-55°C. After aging, the crowns were tested for retention, and the debonded surfaces were examined at 3× magnification. The mean marginal gaps precementation and postcementation were 34.8 ± 17.4 μm and 72.1 ± 31 μm, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the cements. A significant difference (p≤0.001) in retention between the cements was found. The highest values were obtained for SC2 and GCA (1385 Pa and 1229 Pa, respectively), but these presented no statistically significant differences. The lowest values were found for PAN and RXU200 (738 Pa and 489 Pa, respectively), but these showed no statistically significant differences. The predominant mode of failure in all of the groups was mixed, and no correlations were found between marginal gap and retention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document