Effect of different surface treatment protocols on the shear bond strength of perforation repair materials to resin composite

Nagi, Shaymaa M.; Omar, Nada; Salem, Haidy N.; Aly, Yousra

doi:10.1080/01694243.2019.1670582

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After the full-text assessment, four studies were excluded, three because the access to the full document was not achieved [17][18][19], and one because the manuscript was in a language different than English [20]. A total of thirty-seven manuscripts were included in the qualitative analysis, and from these, fifteen were excluded from the meta-analysis because they did not compare a self-etch adhesive against a total-etch adhesive [10,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. Finally, twenty-two manuscripts were included in the meta-analysis [11,.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems to Calcium Silicate-Based Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies

Hardan

Mancino

Bourgi

et al. 2022

Gels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the adhesion of resin composites to calcium silicate-based cement is considered challenging. Therefore, the best adhesion strategy should be indicated. This review aimed to assess the effect of different adhesive systems on the bond strength of resin composite to calcium silicate-based cement through a systematic review and meta-analysis. The subsequent PICOS framework used was: population, calcium silicate-based cement; intervention, use of self-etch adhesive systems; control, use of total-etch adhesive systems; outcome, bond strength; study design, in vitro studies. The literature search was conducted independently by two reviewers up to 18 February 2021. Electronic databases (PubMed, ISI Web of Science, SciELO, Scopus, and Embase) were searched for applicable articles. In vitro manuscripts studying the effect of adhesive systems on the bond strength of calcium silicate-based cement were considered. The meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager Software version 5.3.5 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). Bond strength comparisons were made considering the type of calcium silicate-based cement (Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), Biodentine™, or TheraCal LC®). A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 7321 studies were retrieved in databases searched. After full-text evaluation, 37 eligible papers were assessed for qualitative analysis, leaving a total of 22 papers for the quantitative analysis. According to the meta-analysis, the bond strength values of resin composite materials to MTA and TheraCal LC® cement were favored when a total-etch adhesive system was used (p ≤ 0.02). On the other hand, the meta-analysis of the bond strength of resin-based materials to Biodentine™ calcium silicate-based cement was similar between both approaches (p = 0.12). The in vitro evidence suggests that the bond strength of resin-based materials to both MTA and TheraCal LC® cement was preferred by using the total-etch adhesive strategy. However, when bonding to Biodentine™, the use of self-etch or total-etch strategies displayed promising results. Given the lack of evidence related to the chemical interaction of self-etch adhesive materials with the bioceramics, if self-etch adhesives are used for bonding resin-based restorations to calcium silicate-based cement, a pretreatment with phosphoric acid could be recommended.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems to Calcium Silicate-Based Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies

Hardan

Mancino

Bourgi

et al. 2022

Gels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additional silanization (Silane, Ultradent, South Jordan, UT, USA) was recommended after treating the surface of ProRoot MTA with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s before the application of dentin bonding agent (DBA) for higher bond strength [82]. Further research also suggested air abrasion of MTA Angelus surface after 72 h with 50 µm Al 2 O 3 particles to achieve higher bond strength to the resin composite compared to specimens treated with 37% phosphoric acid (16.98 ± 4.24 MPa and 11.40 ± 3.19 MPa, respectively) [54]. Although the manufacturers of ProRoot, MTA Angelus and Retro MTA claimed short setting times (165 min, 15 min and 1.5 min, respectively), studies showed adequate setting only after at least 7 days to acquire proper surface properties (Tables 2 and 3) [83,84].…”

Section: Mineral Trioxide Aggregatementioning

confidence: 99%

Bio-Inductive Materials in Direct and Indirect Pulp Capping—A Review Article

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article is aimed at analyzing the available research and comparing the properties of bio-inductive materials in direct and indirect pulp capping procedures. The properties and clinical performances of four calcium-silicate cements (ProRoot MTA, MTA Angelus, RetroMTA, Biodentine), a light-cured calcium silicate-based material (TheraCal LC) and an enhanced resin-modified glass-ionomer (ACTIVA BioACTIVE) are widely discussed. A correlation of in vitro and in vivo data revealed that, currently, the most validated material for pulp capping procedures is still MTA. Despite Biodentine's superiority in relatively easier manipulation, competitive pricing and predictable clinical outcome, more long-term clinical studies on Biodentine as a pulp capping agent are needed. According to available research, there is also insufficient evidence to support the use of TheraCal LC or ACTIVA BioACTIVE BASE/LINER in vital pulp therapy.

show abstract

“…A variety of restorative materials are used in VPT including zinc oxide-eugenol cement base (ZOE), IRM, resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), and resin composite (RC) [25][26][27][28]. The shear bond strength (SBS) between MTA and RC has been evaluated in multiple studies using different etching and bonding techniques, which resulted in a wide range of values [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. The SBS of RC to premixed bioceramics has been investigated in limited studies and reported to be lower than MTA [34,39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Four Bioceramic Materials with Different Restorative Materials and Timings

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of a resin composite (RC) and a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) to four different bioceramic materials and to compare the effects of the immediate vs. delayed placement of restoration on the SBS. A total of 160 Teflon blocks and 40 blocks/material, were randomly filled with one of the bioceramic materials (NeoPUTTY®, NeoMTA2®, TotalFill® BC RRM™ Fast Set Putty, and ProRoot® MTA). The restoration was performed immediately or in a delayed time frame (after 7 days) using a Filtek™ Z350 XT Flowable composite (bonded to the bioceramic materials using Single bond universal 3M) or GC Fuji II LC® RMGI. The SBS test was performed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min, and the failure mode was evaluated under a digital microscope by one blinded examiner. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the Games–Howell post hoc test was used to compare the mean SBS between the groups. The mean SBS of the bioceramic materials to RC was significantly higher than to RMGI except for ProRoot MTA (p-value 0.65). The SBS values to RC were as follows: ProRoot MTA (7.64 MPa); NeoMTA2 (8.57 MPa) which was significantly higher than both NeoPUTTY (4.04 MPa) and TotalFill® BC RRM™ Fast Set Putty (4.38 MPa). For RMGI groups, ProRoot MTA showed the highest SBS (7.18 MPa), followed by NeoMTA2 (4.15 MPa), NeoPUTTY (1.62 MPa), and TotalFill® BC RRM™ Fast Set Putty (1.54 MPa). The delayed timing restoration showed a significantly higher SBS than the immediate, except for the immediate RMGI restoration with MTA. To conclude, the SBS of RC to the bioceramic materials was significantly higher than RMGI, except for ProRoot MTA. Both restorative materials had a significantly higher SBS to the MTA groups in comparison to premixed bioceramics. Delayed RC restoration had a higher SBS than immediate restoration. Similarly, delayed RMGI restoration had a higher SBS than immediate restoration with premixed bioceramic but not with MTA.

show abstract

Effect of different surface treatment protocols on the shear bond strength of perforation repair materials to resin composite

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems to Calcium Silicate-Based Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies

Bond Strength of Adhesive Systems to Calcium Silicate-Based Materials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies

Bio-Inductive Materials in Direct and Indirect Pulp Capping—A Review Article

Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Four Bioceramic Materials with Different Restorative Materials and Timings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About