Fracture toughness of resin-based luting cements

Knobloch, Lisa A.; Kerby, Ronald E.; Seghi, Robert R.; Berlin, Jeffrey S.; Lee, Jeff

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(00)80013-x

Cited by 53 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…9 Satisfactory results were obtained with the Elipar FreeLight appliance 10 and by using its own bonding agents, 11 where these fixation agents feature high Knoop hardness, low solubility, little wear, dimensional stability, biocompatibility and fracture resistance. 12 The internal conditioning with an aluminum oxide blast and the internal etching of the restorations has shown satisfactory results in accordance with the current study. According to the literature, 6,13 the aim of the current study was to improve retention between the restoration and the fixation resinous agent.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Influence of the Internal Conditioning of Indirect Restorations of Resin Composite in Relation to Microleakage Using LEDs and QTH Units

Filho¹,

Calabrez²,

Reston³

et al. 2009

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe current study evaluated in-vitro microleakage of indirect composite inlays fixed with flowable composite and resinous cement and cured by LEDs and QTH units, thus modifying the internal conditioning of the inlays. Thirty-two non-carious teeth were selected and 64 cavity preparations were performed in both enamel and cementum. These teeth were divided into four groups: I-Elipar FreeLight appliance and Filtek Flowable composite; II-Ultralux appliance and Filtek Flowable composite; III-Elipar FreeLight appliance and RelyX cement and IVUltralux appliance and RelyX cement. The inlays were internally sandblasted with aluminum oxide, etched with 37% phosphoric acid, washed and silanized. The dental etching was carried out with 37% phosphoric acid for 15 seconds in Clinical RelevanceAn efficient polymerization of resin composite inlays associated with treatment of the surface and luting with dual resinous cement and flowable resin composites presents better longevity of restorations. 294Operative Dentistry dentin and 30 seconds in enamel. After being washed and dried, Single Bond dentinal adhesive was then applied, and the inlays were fixed with their respective luting agents, cured in close contact with their surfaces for 60 seconds, thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine solution. The teeth were then washed and sectioned through the center of the restoration in order for the microleakage readings to be performed using the Image Tool Software. Then, ANOVA and Tukey's statistical tests were applied. In enamel, there was no significant difference for both groups with regard to microleakage; in cementum, the significant difference was 5% (p>0.005).In agreement with the results, the inlays can be fixed with RelyX and Filtek Flowable resins.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Influence of the Internal Conditioning of Indirect Restorations of Resin Composite in Relation to Microleakage Using LEDs and QTH Units

Filho¹,

Calabrez²,

Reston³

et al. 2009

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Resin cements chemically bond to both the ceramic substrate as well as the tooth substance, and thereby reinforce the tooth-reconstruction complex [5,6,[9][10][11][12][13]. Furthermore, their high translucency and tooth-resembling color improve the esthetic result [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the tensile strength of zirconia crowns bonded to dentin: an in vitro study

Stawarczyk

Hartmann²,

Hartmann³

et al. 2011

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tested the impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the tensile strength of zirconia crowns bonded to dentin. Human teeth were prepared and randomly divided into six groups (N = 144, n = 24 per group). For each tooth, a zirconia crown was manufactured. The zirconia crowns were cemented with: (1) Panavia21 (PAN), (2) Panavia21 combined with Gluma Desensitizer (PAN-G), (3) RelyX Unicem (RXU), (4) RelyX Unicem combined with Gluma Desensitizer (RXU-G), (5) G-Cem (GCM) and (6) GCem combined with Gluma Desensitizer (GCM-G). The initial tensile strength was measured in half (n = 12) of each group and the other half (n = 12) subjected to a chewing machine (1.2 Mio, 49 N, 5°C/50°C). The cemented crowns were pulled in a Universal Testing Machine (1 mm/min, Zwick Z010) until failure occurred and tensile strength was calculated. Data were analyzed with one-way and two-way ANOVA followed by a post hoc Scheffé test, t test and Kaplan-Meier analysis with a Breslow-Gehan analysis test ( = 0.05). After the chewing simulation, the self-adhesive resin cements combined with Gluma Desensitizer showed significantly higher tensile strength (RXU-G, 12.8 ± 4.3 MPa; GCM-G, 13.4 ± 6.2 MPa) than PAN (7.3 ± 1.7 MPa) and PAN-G (0.9 ± 0.6). Within the groups, PAN, PAN-G and RXU resulted in significantly lower values when compared to the initial tensile strength; the values of all other test groups were stable. In this study, self-adhesive resin cements combined with Gluma Desensitizer reached better long-term stability compared to PAN and PAN-G after chewing simulation.

show abstract

“…Fracture toughness (K IC ) of a material can be described as its ability to resist crack propagation [34] that may cause breakage. In general, composite resin luting materials have a significantly higher K IC than resinmodified glass ionomers and are superior to conventional glass ionomers [34,44].…”

Section: Mechanical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, composite resin luting materials have a significantly higher K IC than resinmodified glass ionomers and are superior to conventional glass ionomers [34,44]. As for the properties reviewed so far, composite resin luting materials represent the best luting material, probably followed by zinc phosphate cement [36].…”

Section: Mechanical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conventional and adhesive luting cements

Macorra

Pradíes

2002

Clinical Oral Investigations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Luting materials for fixed prosthesis must fulfill special requirements in order to retain indirect restorations and fully maintain the integrity of abutments. The main requirements (inhibition of plaque accumulation, sealing of interface, possible antibacterial effects, acceptable solubility, wear, mechanical properties, adhesion, radiopacity, film thickness, type of curing, esthetics, storage, and cost) are reviewed to update clinical criteria on the selection of suitable materials. It can be concluded that there is no ideal luting material on the market. Alleged improvements in the physical data of newer materials do not necessarily result in better clinical performance. Only clinical trials can confirm the assumed benefits of materials.

show abstract

Fracture toughness of resin-based luting cements

Cited by 53 publications

References 31 publications

Influence of the Internal Conditioning of Indirect Restorations of Resin Composite in Relation to Microleakage Using LEDs and QTH Units

Influence of the Internal Conditioning of Indirect Restorations of Resin Composite in Relation to Microleakage Using LEDs and QTH Units

Impact of Gluma Desensitizer on the tensile strength of zirconia crowns bonded to dentin: an in vitro study

Conventional and adhesive luting cements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About