Effect of temporary cements and their removal methods on the bond strength of indirect restoration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives For a conventional indirect restoration, temporary cementation inevitably contaminated collapsed dentin collagen. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the optimal strategy for minimizing its negative effects. Material and methods Databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for in vitro studies, involving the influence of immediate dentin sealing (IDS), different temporary cements, and their removal strategies on dentin bond strength. The meta-analysis used the inverse variance method with effect method of the standardized mean difference and statistical significance at p ≤ 0.05. The I2 value and the Q-test were used to assess the heterogeneity. Results A total of 14 in vitro trials were subjected to the meta-analysis. Within the study’s limitations, we assumed that IDS eliminated the negative effects of temporary bonding, achieving the comparable immediate bond strength with the control (p = 0.46). In contrast, under delayed dentin sealing (DDS), temporary cementation statistically decreased bond strength (p = 0.002). Compared with resin-based and non-eugenol zinc oxide cements, polycarboxylate and calcium hydroxide cements performed better on bond strength with no statistical difference from the control group (p > 0.05). Among the removal methods of temporary cements, the Al2O3 abrasion restored the decreased bond strength (p = 0.07) and performed better than hand instruments alone (p = 0.04), while pumice removal slightly reduced the bond strength in contrast with the control group (p = 0.05, 95% CI = − 1.62 to 0). Conclusions The choices of IDS, polycarboxylate and calcium hydroxide temporary cements, Al2O3 abrasion removal method were feasible and efficient to enhance the bond strength. Clinical relevance It is worthwhile applying IDS technique, polycarboxylate and calcium hydroxide temporary cements during indirect restoration. The Al2O3 abrasion of cleaning dentin can minimize the negative effects of temporary cement.

Influence of different immediate dentin sealing strategies on bond strength of indirect resin nanoceramic restorations

“…This method was considered less aggressive than the other methods, but it could be responsible for the lower SBS in the protocols involving immediate dentin sealing and bonding after 2 weeks with provisional restoration and immediate dentin sealing with flowable resin composite reinforcement and bonding after 2 weeks with provisional restoration than in the immediate sealing with immediate bonding group; remnants of provisional restoration material might persist on the surface and interfere with the adhesion of resin cement [2]. In addition, Ding et al [48] concluded that the pumice and hand instrument removal methods were ineffective and unreliable for adequate cleaning. Their justification was that some dentinal tubules may be occluded by particle remnants due to the force of rotation, which would reduce wettability and roughness [48].…”

“…In addition, Ding et al [48] concluded that the pumice and hand instrument removal methods were ineffective and unreliable for adequate cleaning. Their justification was that some dentinal tubules may be occluded by particle remnants due to the force of rotation, which would reduce wettability and roughness [48]. Hence, using a dental loupe to explore the dental surfaces before luting the definitive restoration is advised.…”

Clinical outcomes of self-glazed zirconia veneers produced by 3D gel deposition: a retrospective study

“…However, when bonding was needed, two cements could be chosen according to different preparation designs of veneers. Zinc polycarboxylate cement is pulp-friendly and easy to clean [ 35 ], which could be used for temporary bonding of veneers with incisal overlap preparation. For the veneers prepared by window, feather or bevel, they were cemented with a point adhesion technique due to the poor retention [ 36 ].…”

Is Immediate Dentin Sealing of added value in partial indirect restoration?

“…De laatste jaren is er veel onderzoek gedaan naar IDS. Alleen al in 2022 verschenen 3 systematische literatuuronderzoeken met meta-analyses over dit onderwerp (Ding et al, 2022;Hardan et al, 2022;Josic et al, 2022). Tijdens de IDS-procedure wordt het adhesief direct na preparatie van het dentine aangebracht (vóór het afdrukken), zie casus (afb.…”

“…Deze toename van hechtsterkte wordt verkregen omdat het dentine niet kan worden gecontamineerd met een tijdelijk cement of tijdelijke restauratie. In een zeer recent literatuuronderzoek en meta-analyse werd het voordeel (significant betere hechtsterkte) van een IDS en het voorkomen van contaminatie benadrukt (Ding et al, 2022;Hardan et al, 2022). Het andere systematische literatuuronderzoek is wat minder positief omdat dit vooral over postoperatieve pijn rapporteerde (Josic et al, 2022).…”