Effect of acid and laser etching on shear bond strength of conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements to composite resin

Abstract

Success in sandwich technique procedures can be achieved through an acceptable bond between the materials. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of 35% phosphoric acid and Er,Cr:YSGG laser on shear bond strength of conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) to composite resin in sandwich technique. Sixty-six specimens were prepared from each type of glass-ionomer cements and divided into three treatment groups as follows: without pretreatment, acid etching by 35% phosphoric acid for 15 s, and 1-W Er,Cr:YSGG laser treatment for 15 s with a 600-μm-diameter tip aligned perpendicular to the target area at a distance of 1 mm from the surface. Energy density of laser irradiation was 17.7 J/cm(2). Two specimens in each group were prepared for evaluation under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) after surface treatment and the remainder underwent bonding procedure with a bonding agent and composite resin. Then the shear bond strength was measured at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Two-factor analysis of variance and post-hoc Tukey test showed that the cement type, surface treatment method, and the interaction of these two factors significantly affect the shear bond strength between glass-ionomer cements and composite resin (p < 0.05). Surface treatment with phosphoric acid or Er,Cr:YSGG laser increased the shear bond strength of GIC to composite resin; however, in RMGIC only laser etching resulted in significantly higher bond strength. These findings were supported by SEM results. The fracture mode was evaluated under a stereomicroscope at ×20.

Influence of surface treatment of glass-ionomers on surface free energy and bond strength of resin composite

“…Some studies have demonstrated that acid etching enhances the bond strength due to increases in mechanical retention 8) ; however, this has not been confirmed by other studies 9,10) . Such controversial results have been reported based on the bond between GICs and resin composites.…”

Review of possible predictors for pain perception with class 1–5 cavity preparations using Er,Cr:YSGG laser: a retrospective clinical in vivo study

“…In fact, the ability of this laser system to remove tissues with higher water content (like carious dentin) faster than healthy tooth structure offers a unique minimally invasive, selective caries removal potential [22]. Lasers also demonstrate many other benefits, including a caries-preventive effect [23,24], reduced need for acid etching of the prepared tooth structure [25], improved bond strength in composite resin restorations and glass ionomer cements [26], and a comparable degree of micro-leakage with solvent-free bonding agents, as compared to conventional rotary instruments [27]. Additionally, cavity disinfection of up to 0.5 mm below the surface was observed using the Er,Cr:YSGG laser system [28].…”

“…In posterior teeth, pain was most prevalent in class 2, though not to a statistically significant level. A closer look at prevalence of pain, with respect to patient age, found that young adults, age [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35], are the most likely to experience pain with laser preparations, when using the Er,Cr:YSGG system. This finding mimics the dental anxiety study by Stouthard et al [33], whereby the 26-35-year age group was the most likely to experience high levels of dental anxiety.…”

“…Using higher-power settings (3.75 W vs. 2.5 W) for cavity preparation, the resulting pain response was significantly higher, as indicated by the VAS pain scores (P value = 0.0001). As the patients' age increases, the frequency of those experiencing pain decreases, with the exception of a sudden spike for the cohort aged [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35], who proved to be the most sensitive to laser cavity preparation; this group was significantly different from all other age groups (P value = 0.0001). Conclusions The Er,Cr:YSGG laser system is an effective method for pain-free cavity preparations for 85% of the general patient population, who do not suffer from dental anxiety.…”

Effect of the Er, Cr: YSGG Laser Parameters on Shear Bond Strength and Microstructure on Human Dentin Surface

“…The bonding of resin composite material to the tooth structure prepared with different types of lasers has been reported (Visuri et al, 1996;Armengol et al, 1999;Martínez-Insua et al, 2000;Carrieri et al, 2007;Ekworapoj et al, 2007;Lee et al, 2007;de Carvalho et al, 2008;Gurgan et al, 2008;Chou et al, 2009). These studies reported variable results comparing the bond strengths of composite resin to a laser-prepared and acid etched dentin surface, and suggested that the laser preparation is more effective than etching in bonding strength of the composite resin to the tooth structure (Obeidi et al, 2010;Turkmen et al, 2010;Navimipour et al, 2011). This study compared the in vitro SBS of two different adhesive systems to dentin treated with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser.…”