-
BMC Oral Health Dec 2022Adhesive tooth-colored restorations are strongly dependent on the substrate surface cleanliness to allow intimate contact between resin cement and dentin surface, so...
BACKGROUND
Adhesive tooth-colored restorations are strongly dependent on the substrate surface cleanliness to allow intimate contact between resin cement and dentin surface, so several methods were adopted for the total cleaning of temporary cement residues. This study aimed to assess the effect of mechanical and chemo-mechanical cleaning methods of temporary cement on the immediate shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to dentin surface.
METHODS
Forty freshly extracted lower first premolars were cut to expose a flat dentin surface. Discs of temporary crown composite resin material were constructed and cemented to the flat dentin surface using resin-based and non-eugenol temporary cement then stored at room temperature in distilled water. Dividing of samples into two groups according to the method of temporary cement cleaning. Group I (n = 20) mechanical cleaning using the rotary instrument, and group II (n = 20) chemo-mechanical cleaning using chlorhexidine-containing scrub. CAD/CAM reinforced Composite discs were bonded to the dentin surface using self-adhesive composite resin cement, then measurement of shear bond strength was done using a universal testing machine. Further analysis of failure mode after debonding was performed by Scanning electron microscope.
RESULTS
No statistically significant difference was found between the mean shear bond strength of the two cleaning methods (P-value = 0.636). Regardless of the cleaning method, the group cemented with resin-based temporary cement showed statistically significantly higher mean shear bond strength than non-eugenol temporary cement (P-value = 0.048).
CONCLUSION
Both cleaning methods (mechanical and chemo-mechanical) applied in this study were effective in cleaning temporary cement remnants from the dentin substrate surface with statistically significant differences between results of shear bond strength with significantly higher values recorded with resin-based temporary cement.
Topics: Humans; Dental Cements; Resin Cements; Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement; Dentin-Bonding Agents; Dental Bonding; Glass Ionomer Cements; Composite Resins; Dentin; Materials Testing; Shear Strength; Surface Properties; Dental Stress Analysis
PubMed: 36578003
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02672-7 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Mar 2008This literature review summarizes the recent research on fiber posts and provides information regarding their bonding to resinous cement or composites, based on the... (Review)
Review
This literature review summarizes the recent research on fiber posts and provides information regarding their bonding to resinous cement or composites, based on the results of original scientific full-papers from peer-reviewed journals listed in Pub Med. The search was conducted evaluating the different materials available for luting fiber posts to radicular dentin. A consistent number of in vitro studies investigating different combinations of adhesive systems and luting agents for improving bond strength have been published so far. Their results have been summarized in the following categories: conventional resinous cements and self-adhesive cements. Low bond strength values and the lack of long-term clinical data limit the application of recently marketed self-adhesive cements. The choice of the total-etch technique using dual-curing adhesive systems and cements represents the most predictable methodology for luting fiber posts. Particular attention has been deserved also to the post surface treatment for improving their adhesiveness: the methodology may include chemical and/or micro-mechanical treatments. The majority of available literature data is based on studies that investigated different "chair-side" post superficial treatments. According to the in vitro results, surface conditioning improves fiber post bonding properties and bond strength of pre-treated fiber posts to restorative materials is satisfactory. Long-term clinical studies are needed prior to making a general recommendation for their use.
Topics: Dental Cements; Humans
PubMed: 18305446
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Oral Science 2024The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different convergence angles of abutment teeth and different cement spaces on internal adaptation of anterior...
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different convergence angles of abutment teeth and different cement spaces on internal adaptation of anterior fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated with a computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) system.
METHODS
Composite resin FDPs for 99 standardized maxillary central incisors were fabricated according to nine parameters: three total convergence angles (4 [DG4], 12 [DG12], and 20 degrees [DG20]) and three cement space settings (10 [CS10], 50 [CS50], and 90 µm [CS90]). Internal space values were measured with a cement space replica technique. The Kruskal-Wallis and Steel-Dwass tests were used to evaluate differences in the total convergence angles and luting agent spaces, respectively (α = 0.05).
RESULTS
For all three cement spaces tested, the median marginal gap values between abutment teeth and FDPs decreased significantly as the total convergence angle increased (P < 0.05). For the CS10 and CS50 groups, the internal space values at the axial area increased significantly as the total convergence angles increased (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Total convergence angles of the abutment teeth and cement spaces affected the marginal and internal adaptation of anterior FDPs fabricated with a CAD-CAM system.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Cements; Glass Ionomer Cements; Composite Resins; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Porcelain
PubMed: 38233155
DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.23-0321 -
Medical Science Monitor Basic Research Nov 2022BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of dental cement materials for the prevention of bacterial growth, which can cause...
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial effectiveness of dental cement materials for the prevention of bacterial growth, which can cause failure of fixed cementation. MATERIAL AND METHODS We developed an agar diffusion disk test in-house to evaluate the antibacterial properties of 3 commercially available dental cement materials (Ketac, Harvard FLB, and Panavia SA Universal Dual Resin cements) compared with a negative control. The materials were tested for the inhibition against Streptococcus mutans (ATCC 10449), Streptoccocus salivarius (ATCC 25975), Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC 29212), and Lactobacilus acidophilus (ATCC 4356). The antimicrobial effectiveness of materials was expressed as the diameters of the inhibition zones around the disk. RESULTS Overall, 240 specimens were tested. All cement materials showed antimicrobial effectiveness. Different microbial strains reacted differently to the different dental cements (all P.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Streptococcus mutans; Resin Cements
PubMed: 36394828
DOI: 10.12659/MSMBR.937893 -
Dental Materials Journal Feb 2019The objectives were to develop a novel rechargeable cement containing amorphous calcium-phosphate nanoparticles (nanoACP) to suppress tooth decay. Five cements were made...
The objectives were to develop a novel rechargeable cement containing amorphous calcium-phosphate nanoparticles (nanoACP) to suppress tooth decay. Five cements were made with: (1) 60% glass particles (experimental control); (2) 40% glass+20% nanoACP; (3) 30% glass+30% nanoACP; (4) 20% glass+40% nanoACP; (5) 10% glass+50% nanoACP. Groups 1-4 had enamel bond strengths similar to Transbond XT (3M) and Vitremer (3M) (p>0.1). The nanoACP cement had calcium and phosphate ion release which increased with increasing nanoACP fillers. The recharged cement had substantial ion re-release continuously for 14 days after a single recharge. Ion re-release did not decrease with increasing recharge/re-release cycles. Groups 3-5 maintained a safe pH of medium (>5.5); however, control cements had cariogenic pH of medium (<4.5) due to biofilm acid. Therefore, nanoACP cement (1) had good bond strength to enamel, (2) possessed calcium and phosphate ion recharge/re-release capability, and (3) raised biofilm pH to a safe level to inhibit caries.
Topics: Biofilms; Calcium Phosphates; Composite Resins; Dental Caries; Dental Cements; Glass; Glass Ionomer Cements; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Ions; Materials Testing; Nanoparticles; Resin Cements; Shear Strength; Tooth Remineralization
PubMed: 30504692
DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2017-420 -
Australian Dental Journal Jun 2016Reliable bonding between high strength ceramics and resin composite cement is difficult to achieve because of their chemical inertness and lack of silica content. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Reliable bonding between high strength ceramics and resin composite cement is difficult to achieve because of their chemical inertness and lack of silica content. The aim of this review was to assess the current literature describing methods for resin bonding to ceramics with high flexural strength such as glass-infiltrated alumina and zirconia, densely sintered alumina and yttria-partially stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystalline ceramic (Y-TZP) with respect to bond strength and bond durability.
METHODS
Suitable peer reviewed publications in the English language were identified through searches performed in PubMed, Google Search and handsearches. The keywords or phrases used were 'resin-ceramic bond', 'silane coupling agents', 'air particle abrasion', 'zirconia ceramic' and 'resin composite cements'. Studies from January 1989 to June 2015 were included.
RESULTS
The literature demonstrated that there are multiple techniques available for surface treatments but bond strength testing under different investigations have produced conflicting results.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the scope of this review, there is no evidence to support a universal technique of ceramic surface treatment for adhesive cementation. A combination of chemical and mechanical treatments might be the recommended solution. The hydrolytic stability of the resin ceramic bond should be enhanced.
Topics: Acrylic Resins; Ceramics; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Composite Resins; Dental Bonding; Dental Cements; Humans; Materials Testing; Surface Properties
PubMed: 26268746
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12365 -
Dental Materials Journal Sep 2021This research aimed to evaluate the effect of cement space on the marginal discrepancy and retention of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)...
This research aimed to evaluate the effect of cement space on the marginal discrepancy and retention of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) crowns. A total of 30 premolar Frasaco teeth were machined to receive crowns with cement spaces of 70, 90, and 110 μm. The marginal discrepancy measurements were done before and after cementation. Pull-off test was conducted using universal testing machine (UTM). Data was analyzed using two-way mixed ANOVA with post-hoc Bonferroni test and Kruskal-Wallis test. The crowns with cement space of 70 μm showed a significantly higher absolute marginal discrepancy than those with 90 and 110 μm. No significant effect on the crown retention was found. Within the limitations of this study, modifying cement space to 90 μm and 110 μm may improve the marginal adaptation of CAD/CAM crown, whereas adjusting cement space from 70 to 110 μm did not significantly affect the crown retention.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Crowns; Dental Cements; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Materials; Dental Prosthesis Design
PubMed: 34078778
DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2020-408 -
BMC Oral Health Nov 2021Pull-off forces of cement-retained zirconia reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) in implant-supported single crowns on stock titanium abutments with respect to abutment...
BACKGROUND
Pull-off forces of cement-retained zirconia reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) in implant-supported single crowns on stock titanium abutments with respect to abutment height and implant cement were evaluated and compared.
METHODS
Pull-off force of ZLS crowns on stock titanium abutments was evaluated concerning dental cement and abutment height. A total sample size of 64 stock abutments with heights of 3 mm (n = 32) and 5 mm (n = 32) was used. The ZLS crowns were cemented with four different types of cement (one temporary, two semi-permanent, and one permanent). After cementation, water storage, and thermocycling each sample was subjected to a pull-off test using a universal testing machine.
RESULTS
The temporary cement showed the least pull-off force regardless of abutment height (3/5 mm: means 6 N/23 N), followed by the semi-permanent methacrylate-infiltrated zinc oxide cement (28 N/55 N), the semi-permanent methacrylate-based cement (103 N/163 N), and the permanent resin composite cement (238 N/820 N). Results of all types of cement differed statistically significantly from each other (p ≤ .012). The type of implant cement has an impact on the pull-off force of ZLS crowns and titanium abutments.
CONCLUSIONS
Permanent cements present higher retention than semi-permanent ones, and temporary cements present the lowest values. The abutment height had a subordinate impact.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Abutments; Dental Cements; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Stress Analysis; Humans; Lithium; Materials Testing; Silicates; Titanium; Zirconium
PubMed: 34798850
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01958-6 -
Journal of Dentistry Dec 2021Objectives To determine the clinical performance of partial ceramic crowns (PCCs) luted with a conventional resin cement combined with a universal adhesive without or... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Randomized clinical split-mouth study on the performance of CAD/CAM-partial ceramic crowns luted with a self-adhesive resin cement or a universal adhesive and a conventional resin cement after 39 months.
Objectives To determine the clinical performance of partial ceramic crowns (PCCs) luted with a conventional resin cement combined with a universal adhesive without or with selective enamel etching or luted with a self-adhesive resin cement. Methods In a split-mouth design, each three CAD/CAM-PCCs (Vita Mark II, Cerec) were placed in 50 patients. Two PCCs were luted with a conventional resin cement (RelyX Ultimate) combined with a universal adhesive (Scotchbond Universal) without (SB-E) or with (SB+E) selective enamel etching. The third PCC was luted with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem 2; RXU). Chi-square tests (α≤0.05) were applied. Based on clinical failures (complete debonding or need for replacement of the restorations), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. Results 31 patients were evaluated clinically using FDI criteria at 39 months. Clinically acceptable results were detected over time, except for "fracture of material and retention" (inacceptable fractures and debondings). Within materials, statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.003) between baseline and 39 months were found for "marginal adaptation" and "marginal staining". At 39-month, SB+E and SB-E showed significantly better results compared to RXU in "marginal adaptation"(p ≤ 0.021) and "marginal staining"(p ≤ 0.013). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed higher survival rates after 39 months for SB+E (96%) and SB-E (88%) compared to RXU (69%) with statistically significant differences between RXU vs. SB-E (p = 0.022) and RXU vs. SB+E (p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions After 39-months, PCCs luted with the self-adhesive resin cement exhibited a statistically significant inferior survival rate compared to restorations luted with the conventional resin cement combined with a universal adhesive without or with selective enamel etching. Clinical significance Currently, self-adhesive resin cements cannot be recommended for luting partial ceramic crowns. However, the standard adhesive luting procedure comprising a universal adhesive and luting composite yielded good clinical results for more than 3 years irrespectively of application of a selective enamel etching step.
Topics: Acid Etching, Dental; Ceramics; Crowns; Dental Cements; Dental Enamel; Humans; Materials Testing; Resin Cements; Surface Properties
PubMed: 34624421
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103837 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Nov 2014To determine and compare the pH, conductivity and calcium release of an experimental Portland cement (PE) consisting of trioxid mineral aggregate and a comercially... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
INTRODUCTION
To determine and compare the pH, conductivity and calcium release of an experimental Portland cement (PE) consisting of trioxid mineral aggregate and a comercially available modified Portland cement (C.P.M.) after 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 15 and 30 days.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Cements were mixed following the manufacturer's instructions, with a powder: liquid ratio of 3:1. Each cement was placed in 12 PVC tubes 1 mm in diameter and 10 mm in length and allowed to set. Four empty tubes were used as negative controls. Tubes were submerged in plastic flasks containing 10 ml deionized water and stored at 37 C and 100% humidity. After 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 15 and 30 days tubes were removed from the flasks and these were refilled with deionized water. We measured pH, conductivity and calcium content of the recovered solution. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS
pH was 0.3 units more alkaline with PE cement (p=0.023). pH experienced a slight decrease with time (p<0.001), independently of the cement type (p>0.05). Conductivity of PE and CPM cements diminished at 4 days and almost recovered at 30 days (p<0.001). PE cement had a higher conductivity (p<0.001). Calcium release diminished from the first day and recovered at 30 days (p<0.001) similarly for both cements (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
PE cement raised pH slightly more and had higher conductivity than CPM. Calcium release diminished after the first day and recovered at 30 days, similarly for both cements.
Topics: Aluminum Compounds; Calcium Compounds; Dental Cements; Drug Combinations; Materials Testing; Oxides; Silicates; Time Factors
PubMed: 25350596
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.19936