journal article·2013-03

Effect of different mechanical cleansing protocols of dentin for recementation procedures on micro-shear bond strength of conventional and self-adhesive resin cements

A.B. Bavbek, B. Goktas, A. Sahinbas, B. Ozçopur, G. Eskitascioglu, M. Özcan

Publisher page

Abstract

Service life of debonded indirect dental restorations could be prolonged by recementation. This process requires removal of cement remnants from dentin. This study evaluated the effect of different mechanical cleansing protocols of dentin for recementation procedures on micro-shear bond strength (μSBS) of conventional and self-adhesive resin cements. The labial surfaces mandibular incisors ( N=200) were ground with a low speed saw to expose the coronal dentin. The teeth were randomly divided into two subgroups ( n : 100 per group) and received either (a) conventional (Panavia F 2.0, Kuraray, PAN) or (b) self-adhesive (Clearfil SA, Kuraray, CSA) resin cement. Resin cements were condensed into polyethylene molds incrementally and photo polymerized using an LED polymerization unit. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and subjected to μSBS (0.5 mm/min). Resin cement remnants on bonded dentin surfaces were removed using by (a) composite finishing bur (cb), (b) tungsten carbide bur (ob), (c) ultrasonic scaler tip (sc) or (d) pumice-water slurry (pw). Non-cleaned teeth acted as the control group (cn) ( n : 20 per subgroup). After cleaning, the same cement type was rebonded simulating clinical recementation. Failure types were analyzed using optical microscope and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Data (MPa) were analyzed using Wilcoxon Signed Ranks, Mann-Whitney U and Bonferroni tests ( α=0.05). Overall, CSA (6.42±2.96) showed significantly lower results than that of PAN cement (7.88±3.49) ( p<0.05). All cleansing protocols (4.29±2.17 to 5.82±2.5) showed significantly lower results than that of the control group (9.84±4.88) for PAN cement. For CSA cement, all cleansing protocols presented non-significant results (4.25±2.74 to 6.44±2.4 MPa) compared to control group ( p>0.05) expect cb method (3.42±1.47) ( p <0.05). Remnants of cements were detected on dentin surfaces in all groups at varying degrees. SEM showed that while using pumice-water slurry was the least effective for PAN, tungsten carbide bur was the most effective for both cements. All other methods showed similar cleansing efficacy. None of the cleansing protocols yielded to complete removal of resin cement rest on dentin upon recementation for both cements tested.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Dental Research and COVID-19 · Dental Trauma and Treatments

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (41)

Show source-provided references
1. In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth10.1067/mpr.2002.128123 ↗
2. Clinical complications in fixed prosthodontics10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00214-2 ↗
3. A clinically focused discussion of luting materials10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01297.x ↗
4. Complication and failure rates of fixed dental prostheses in patients treated for periodontal disease10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02095.x ↗
5. Influence of tooth preparation taper and cement type on recementation strength of complete metal crowns10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60192-X ↗
6. Classification system for conventional crown and fixed partial denture failures10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60064-5 ↗
7. To what extent does the longevity of fixed dental prostheses depend on the function of the cement? Working Group 4 materials: cementation10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01442.x ↗
8. Self-adhesive resin cements - chemistry, properties and clinical considerations10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02148.x ↗
9. Evaluation of the adhesion of fiber posts cemented using different adhesive approaches10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00577.x ↗
10. Behr M., Rosentritt M., Wimmer J., Lang R., Kolbeck C., Burgers R., et al. Self-adhesive resin cement versus zinc phosphate luting material: a prospective clinical trial begun 2003. Dent Mater 2009;25:601-604.10.1016/j.dental.2008.11.003 ↗
11. Two-year clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive luting agent for ceramic inlays
12. Influence of temporary cement remnant and surface cleaning method on bond strength to dentin of a composite luting system10.2334/josnusd.47.9 ↗
13. The effects of tooth preparation cleansing protocols on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to contaminated dentin10.2341/07-141 ↗
14. The effect of microetching on the bond strength of metal brackets when bonded to previously bonded teeth: an in vitro study10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70192-1 ↗
15. In-vivo and in-vitro comparison of bond strengths of orthodontic brackets bonded to enamel and debonded at various times10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.025 ↗
16. The effect of surface treatments on the rebounded resin-bonded retainers
17. Effect of the dentin cleansing techniques on dentin wetting and on the bond strength of a resin luting agent10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.07.009 ↗
18. Vital tooth cleaning for cementation of indirect restorations: a review
19. Effect of testing methods on the bond strength of resin to zirconia-alumina ceramic: microtensile versus shear test10.4012/dmj.27.849 ↗
20. Bond efficacy and interface morphology of self-etching adhesives to ground enamel
21. The use of resin cements in restorative dentistry to overcome retention problems
22. Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents10.1016/j.dental.2009.10.004 ↗
23. A review of our development of dental adhesives-effects of radical polymerization initiators and adhesive monomers on adhesion10.4012/dmj.2009-057 ↗
24. Comparison of micro push-out bond strengths of two fiber posts luted using simplified adhesive approaches10.4012/dmj.2009-089 ↗
25. Self-assembled nano-layering at the adhesive interface10.1177/0022034512437375 ↗
26. Bond strength of two resin cements on dentin using different cementation strategies10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00349.x ↗
27. Effect of surface conditioning and taper angle on the retention of IPS e.max Press crowns10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00547.x ↗
28. Effect of pre-cure temperature on the bonding potential of self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.012 ↗
29. In vitro wear gap formation of self-adhesive resin cements: a CLSM evaluation10.1016/j.jdent.2009.08.006 ↗
30. Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin after antibacterial and chelating solution treatment
31. Immediate bonding effectiveness of contemporary composite cements to dentin10.1007/s00784-009-0327-8 ↗
32. Effects of various agents in cleaning cut dentine10.1111/j.1365-2842.1985.tb01284.x ↗
33. Selective removal of residual composite from dental enamel surfaces using the third harmonic of a Q-switched Nd:YAG laser10.1002/lsm.10018 ↗
34. Comparison of finishing and polishing systems for residual resin removal after debonding10.1590/S1678-77572009000300015 ↗
35. Retention of metal ceramic crowns cemented with resin cements: effects of preparation taper and height10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90012-8 ↗
36. Effect of filler size on wear resistance of resin cement10.1007/s10266-001-8183-2 ↗
37. Effect of dentin-cleaning techniques on the shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to dentin10.2341/10-392-L ↗
38. Bond strength of a resin cement to dentin using the resin coating technique10.1590/S1806-83242008000300002 ↗
39. Effect of resin coating and chlorhexidine on the microleakage of two resin cements after storage10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00670.x ↗
40. Effect of physicochemical aging conditions on the composite–composite repair bond strength
41. Effect of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00073.x ↗