Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Various Glass Ionomer Cements to Dentin of Primary Teeth: An<i>in vitro</i>Study

Sibal, Gurleen K

doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1362

Cited by 37 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), which is also considered as a self-adhesive material/cement, has been developed by adding resin components to GIC to overcome the problem of moisture sensitivity, and offers the benefit of both resins and GIC like fluoride release and greater strength (Kapoor, Prabhu, & Balakrishnan, 2017;Pathak, Shashibhushan, Poornima, & Reddy, 2016;Rosenstiel, Land, & Crispin, 1998). In RMGIC, the resin component was thought to act as a reinforcing agent, resulting in the combination of micromechanical interlocking and chemical adhesion (Sekhar, Anil, Thomas, & Ginjupalli, 2017;Somani, Jaidka, Singh, & Sibal, 2016). RelyX Luting used in the study is a resin-modified powder/liquid glass ionomer luting cement and the results showed there was an inverse relationship between shear bond strength and severity of fluorosis, except comparison between moderate and severe groups had no statistical significance, which was partially in accordance with Awliya and Akpata (1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a filled adhesive as the desensitizer on bond strength of “Self‐Adhesive Cements To” differently severity of fluorosed dentin

Tan

et al. 2018

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives were to evaluate the efficacy of a filled adhesive named Prime & Bond NT (P&B NT) as the dentin desensitizer in occluding fluorosis dentinal tubules and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of RelyX U200 self-adhesive resin cement (RXU) and RelyX Luting self-adhesive resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) before and after P&B NT pretreatment. 176 non-carious fluorosis were classified into four subgroups by the Thylstrup and Fejerskov index (TFI): normal group (TFI = 0), mild group (TFI = 1-3), moderate group (TFI = 4-5), severe group (TFI = 6-9). 160 composite cylinders (4 × 5 mm) were fabricated, then every severity of fluorosed dentin was subjected to four treatments: P&B NT + RXU (n = 40), RXU (n = 40), P&B NT + RMGIC (n = 40), RMGIC (n = 40). The specimens were immersed in water at 37°C for 24 hr first and half of them underwent 5,000 thermocycling before shear bond strength test. A factorial design (factorial 4 × 2 × 2 × 2) was developed to make statistical analysis. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis (n = 16) in cross section and longitudinal section view characterized the occlusion situation of dentinal tubules. P&B NT might occlude dentinal tubules as the dentin desensitizer for normal teeth and mild-moderate fluorosis. P&B NT significantly increased the SBS of RXU (p < .05) but had no statistical significance on the SBS of RMGIC (p > .05). RXU could benefit from P&B NT desensitization to achieve a better quality of adhesion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a filled adhesive as the desensitizer on bond strength of “Self‐Adhesive Cements To” differently severity of fluorosed dentin

Tan

et al. 2018

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rate of clinical success of any intra-oral restorative materials depends mainly upon sealing ability and good adhesion of such restoration with tooth structure, and its resistance to various dislodging forces acting within the oral cavity. These bonds are not only important between restoration and tooth structure to prevent microleakage and minimize pulp irritation, hypersensitivity, or secondary caries but also, between cement base and tooth to remain in its place under masticatory function or during the application overlying restorative material (3,37) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Shear bond strength could be defined as, the resistance to forces that tend to slide restorative material past tooth structure. As the major dislodging forces at the tooth restoration interface are of shearing type, so this type of strength is of greater importance to be determined than any other types of intra oral stresses (3) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conventional glass ionomer cements (CGICs) have many properties that make them a leading restorative material such as direct chemical bonding to tooth structure, antibacterial & anti-cariogenic activities as a result of fluoride release, mild pulpal irritation, and negligible dimensional changes during setting that minimize the microleakage compared to composite resin (3,4) . Moreover, CGICs can be used in many clinical situations, such as cementation for indirect restorations, liner or base material, especially under composite restorations, and as esthetic restoration in primary dentition and in low stress bearing areas (3)(4)(5) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, conventional GICs still have some drawbacks that limit their usage to non-stress bearing areas, as attack by moisture during the initial setting period, short working time, long setting and maturation time which dictates postponing the finishing and polishing procedure to an additional visit, low mechanical properties, low fracture toughness, high abrasiveness and exhibiting very low wear resistance (3)(4)(5)(6) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bioactive Resin Modified GIC vs. Conventional One in Vivo and in Vitro Study

Beltagy

Elhatery

2018

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE:To evaluate the bioactive resin modified GIC material (Activa) vs. conventional one (Vitremer) clinically and laboratory. Materials & Methods: Clinically:Fifteen healthy children of both sexes aged (4-7) having a bilateral similar initial occlusal caries on the lower 2 nd primary molars were selected. A split-mouth design was used where conventional Class I cavities were prepared on carious molars. One side was restored with Activa and the contra-lateral side restored with Vitremer (control). The patients were recalled for clinical evaluation at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperative. The modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria were used. Laboratory: included: 1. Mechanical strength tests (compressive and diametral tensile). 2. Shear bond strength test between both restorative materials and dentin. Statistical analysis: Mann Whitney test was used for clinical evaluation, while t-test and ANOVA were used for laboratory evaluation. The significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05. Results: Clinically:The overall clinical outcome showed no significant difference between both groups in all evaluated criteria (p>0.05). Laboratory: Activa showed higher values than Vitremer in all tested groups and the differences were significant (p<0.05) Conclusion: Activa recorded better scores than Vitremer in nearly all tested clinical criteria but without significant differences between them during recall-time intervals. But, the laboratory differences in all tested groups were significant.

show abstract

Evaluation of the effect of nano‐graphene oxide on shear bond strength of conventional and resin‐modified glass ionomer cement

Ghodrati,

Sharafeddin

2023

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesRecently, nano‐graphene oxide (nGO), a material with unique mechanical properties, has been introduced to improve the properties of glass ionomer cement (GIC). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of adding nGO on the shear bond strength (SBS) of conventional (CGIC) and resin‐modified GIC (RMGIC).MethodsSixty intact molars were mounted and their occlusal surface was cut at a depth of 1 mm below the dentinoenamel junction. 1 wt.% and 2 wt.% of nGO (US Research Nanomaterials, Inc.) were added to CGIC and RMGIC (GC Corporation). The samples were randomly divided into six groups (n = 10), including 1: CGIC, 2: CGIC + 1% GO, 3: CGIC + 2% GO, 4: RMGIC, 5: RMGIC + 1% GO, and 6: RMGIC + 2% GO. Plastic molds were placed on the surface of the dentin pretreated with 10% polyacrylic acid (GC Corporation) and filled with prepared cement according to the manufacturer's instruction. After 24 h of storage in an incubator, the SBS test was done by the universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using two‐way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey tests (p < .05).ResultsIn the group of CGIC, mean SBS was significantly lower than all other study groups (p < .001), and groups 5 (RMGIC + 1% GO) and 6 (RMGIC + 2% GO) showed significantly higher values compared to all other study groups (p < .001). However, the difference between groups 2 and 3, as well as the difference between groups 5 and 6, was not significant (p = .999 andp = .994, respectively). RMGI groups had significantly higher SBS than their corresponding CGIC groups.ConclusionsThe addition of 1% and 2% nGO significantly increased the SBS of CGIC and RMGIC to the dentin, which can be considered as a promising point for wider clinical application of this material.

show abstract

Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Various Glass Ionomer Cements to Dentin of Primary Teeth: Anin vitroStudy

Cited by 37 publications

References 91 publications

Effect of a filled adhesive as the desensitizer on bond strength of “Self‐Adhesive Cements To” differently severity of fluorosed dentin

Effect of a filled adhesive as the desensitizer on bond strength of “Self‐Adhesive Cements To” differently severity of fluorosed dentin

Bioactive Resin Modified GIC vs. Conventional One in Vivo and in Vitro Study

Evaluation of the effect of nano‐graphene oxide on shear bond strength of conventional and resin‐modified glass ionomer cement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About