Abstract:The placement of glass ionomer cement as lining material below composite fillings was introduced by McLean and Wilson in 1977. This technique incorporated different layers of restorative materials placed onto tooth, similar to layers of a sandwich. It was proposed this technique will provide a molecular seal to dentine in addition to mechanical and aesthetic properties of composite resin. Placement of liner or an intermediate layer underneath the main bulk of restorative materials reduces polymerization shrin… Show more
Managing deep carious lesions has become increasingly complex due to the introduction of numerous materials and techniques. This review addresses contemporary concepts regarding selecting adhesive agents at the interface between glass ionomer cements (GICs) or calcium silicate-based cements (CSCs) and resin composite restoration in laminate and layered restorations. The published literature was retrieved from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus by using specific keywords “adhesive agents,” “TheraCal LC,” “Biodentine,” “Glass ionomer,” “bond strength,” “sandwich technique,” “etch-and-rinse,” “self-etch,” “universal adhesive,” and “bonding.” The list of references from each identified article was examined to find other potentially relevant articles. Results: For GICs, self-etch adhesives (SE) appear more beneficial than etch and rinse adhesives (ER). The ER, or Universal adhesive (UA) used in the self-etch mode, might be recommended if the final composite is placed in a subsequent session after Biodentine has fully set. TheraCal LC, on the other hand, tends to yield higher bond strengths when used in conjunction with ER or UA systems in SE mode. Overall, selecting adhesive agents for laminate and layered restorations depends on various factors, including the specific materials used, the desired clinical outcome, and the setting time available. While some trends suggest the superiority of certain adhesive systems, the literature remains inconclusive for specific materials. Further research is needed to establish definitive guidelines for adhesive selection in these complex clinical scenarios.
Managing deep carious lesions has become increasingly complex due to the introduction of numerous materials and techniques. This review addresses contemporary concepts regarding selecting adhesive agents at the interface between glass ionomer cements (GICs) or calcium silicate-based cements (CSCs) and resin composite restoration in laminate and layered restorations. The published literature was retrieved from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus by using specific keywords “adhesive agents,” “TheraCal LC,” “Biodentine,” “Glass ionomer,” “bond strength,” “sandwich technique,” “etch-and-rinse,” “self-etch,” “universal adhesive,” and “bonding.” The list of references from each identified article was examined to find other potentially relevant articles. Results: For GICs, self-etch adhesives (SE) appear more beneficial than etch and rinse adhesives (ER). The ER, or Universal adhesive (UA) used in the self-etch mode, might be recommended if the final composite is placed in a subsequent session after Biodentine has fully set. TheraCal LC, on the other hand, tends to yield higher bond strengths when used in conjunction with ER or UA systems in SE mode. Overall, selecting adhesive agents for laminate and layered restorations depends on various factors, including the specific materials used, the desired clinical outcome, and the setting time available. While some trends suggest the superiority of certain adhesive systems, the literature remains inconclusive for specific materials. Further research is needed to establish definitive guidelines for adhesive selection in these complex clinical scenarios.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.