Long-term bond between dual-polymerizing cementing agents and human hard dental tissue

Piwowarczyk, Andree; Bender, Ralf; Ottl, Peter; Lauer, Hans–Christoph

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2006.01.012

Cited by 119 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3,[11][12][13] The bond strength of RelyX Unicem to dentin obtained in this study ranged from 15.7 ± 2.9 MPa to 19.7 ± 2.8 MPa. These values were higher than those obtained by Piwowarczyk et al 14 11 Sarr et al, 19 Luhrs et al, 20 Mazzitelli et al, 21 Ebert et al, 22 and Inukai et al 23 Although the hydrated dentin substrate can facilitate ionization of the acid monomers, the results of this study suggested that the humidity conditions did not affect the bond strength of RelyX Unicem to dentin, i.e., no significant difference was observed when the self-adhesive was applied to surfaces with different humidity conditions. Conversely, when Guarda et al 24 did not over-dry the dentin surface before cementation, a higher bond strength was observed for RelyX Unicem.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dry and moist dentin

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effects of humidity conditions and evaluation times on the dentin bond strength (DBS) of two self-adhesive resin cements (RC). The RC used were: RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE) and Clearfil SA Cement (Kuraray Med.). One hundred and twenty coronal portions of bovine incisors (n = 10) were used. Buccal surfaces were abraded in order to expose a flat dentinal surface (180-grit SiC) and to standardize the smear layer formation (600-grit SiC). The humidity conditions tested were: dry (air-dried for 10 s), slightly moist (water application with disposable applicator on dried dentin and water excess removed with absorbent paper), and moist (same application without water removal). The RC were used according to the manufacturers' recommendations and were applied to prepolymerized resin discs (2 mm thick; Sinfony, 3M ESPE), which were subsequently bonded to the dentin surfaces. After 24 h, half of the teeth were prepared for the microtensile bond strength test, while the other half were stored in water for 6 months and tested in tension (0.5 mm/min) until failure. A 3-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test were performed (preset alpha of 0.05). No RC showed any reduction of DBS after 6 months, and no significant difference was observed between them. The moist dentin increased the bond strength of Clearfil SA Cement for both periods of time. Humidity conditions can change the DBS; however, the study's results were product-dependent.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 55%

Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dry and moist dentin

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, their useful properties of minimal solubility, stability, and biocompatibility greatly contribute to the formation of strong and durable tooth-restoration interfaces, with minimal removal of adjacent tooth tissue 3,4) . However, adhesion of luting resin cements to processed composites has been difficult to achieve.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Physical Properties and Surface Degradation of Self-adhesive Resin Cements

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study sought to evaluate the pH value, film thickness, filler particle percentage, and morphological changes of selfadhesive resin luting cements. Products tested were G-Cem, Maxcem, Smart Cem, and RelyX™ Unicem. Cement pH was measured with pH test paper. Filler particle percentage was calculated after cement samples were incinerated at 750℃. To test film thickness, mixed cements were placed between two glass plates and compressed using a loading device. For morphological changes, specimen surfaces were observed by SEM after treatment with various media. There were significant differences among the cement pH values measured at 20 seconds after light curing, and at 90 seconds and 48 hours after mixing. Filler particle percentage was directly proportional to film thickness. Degradation of cement surfaces was also detected after surface polishing and immersion in water, acetic acid, and acetone. In conclusion, significant differences were found in the surface properties of the materials tested, and these differences might lead to differences in their clinical performance.

show abstract

“…The preliminary in vitro studies confirmed how difficult it is to completely eliminate the residual smear layer, particularly in the apical portion of the root. (21) Maria Isabel et al (2013), (22) studied the effects of 980-nm diode laser on the ultrastructure and fracture resistance of dentine with different irradiation energies (without irradiation, 1.5 W/100 Hz and 3.0 W/100 Hz). The laser treatment did not alter the fracture resistance of roots treated with 1.5 W/ 100 Hz (246.3±29.5 N) and 3.0 W/100 Hz (215.3±25.1 N) laser power.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Laser Treatment, Self-Adhesive Resin Cement Brand and Thermocycling on Push out Bond Strength of Fiber Reinforced Post

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The interface between the adhesive resin and fiber posts has an important role in their performance. However, It was found that the most frequent cause of their failure is debonding at the adhesive resin-dentin interface. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of laser treatment: Erbium, Diode or no treatment; and two brands of self-adhesive resin cement: hydrophobic (Smartcem2) and conventional (Breeze); in addition to the effect of thermocycling on push out bond strength of Glassix fiber-reinforced composite post. A total of ninety-six freshly extracted natural human teeth were equally divided into three main groups after root canal treatment, decoronatin and post space preparation. Teeth of group 1 were treated with Er,Cr:YSGG laser, group 2 were treated with Diode laser, while the teeth of group 3 [control] received no laser treatment. Posts in half of the speciemens of the three groups were cemented with hydrophobic resin cement (Smartcem2) and the rest were cemented with conventional resin cement (Breeze). Samples of each group were further subdivided into two subgroups according to whether they were thermocycled or not. Three slices of 3mm-thickness: cervical, middle and apical were prepared from each root. Then a push-out test was performed using universal testing machine at a strain rate of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed using Unpaired t test. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to study the effect of different variables' interactions. This was followed by Tukey's post hoc test when a significant difference was detected. The significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. The results revealed that the Er,Cr:YSGG -2790 nm laser afforded greater bond strength than the diode laser. The hydrophobic self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated higher bond strength than the other brand. In addition, thermal stresses induced by thermocycling reduced the bond strength of Glassix fiber post.

show abstract

Long-term bond between dual-polymerizing cementing agents and human hard dental tissue

Cited by 119 publications

References 23 publications

Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dry and moist dentin

Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dry and moist dentin

Evaluation of Physical Properties and Surface Degradation of Self-adhesive Resin Cements

Effect of Laser Treatment, Self-Adhesive Resin Cement Brand and Thermocycling on Push out Bond Strength of Fiber Reinforced Post

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About