The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effect of resin cement type and cleaning method on the shear bond strength of resin cements for recementing restorations

  • Received : 2016.08.07
  • Accepted : 2017.01.10
  • Published : 2017.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. This laboratory study assessed the effect of different dentin cleaning procedures on shear bond strength of resin cements for recementing prosthesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A $4{\times}4$ flat surface was prepared on the labial surface of 52 maxillary central incisors. Metal frames ($4{\times}4{\times}1.5mm$) were cast with nickel-chromium alloy. All specimens were randomly divided into 2 groups to be cemented with either Panavia F2.0 (P) or RelyX Ultimate (U) cement. The initial shear bond strength was recorded by Universal Testing Machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Debonded specimens were randomly allocated into 2 subgroups (n = 13) according to the dentin cleaning procedures for recementation. The residual cement on bonded dentin surfaces was eliminated with either pumice slurry (p) or tungsten carbide bur (c). The restorations were rebonded with the same cement and were subjected to shear test. Data failed the normality test (P < .05), thus were analyzed with Mann Whitney U-test, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and two-way ANOVA after logarithmic transformation (${\alpha}=.05$). RESULTS. The initial shear bond strength of group P was significantly higher than group U (P = .001). Pc and Uc groups presented higher bond strength after recementation compared to the initial bond strength. However, it was significant only in Pc group (P = .034). CONCLUSION. The specimens recemented with Panavia F2.0 provided higher bond strength than RelyX Ultimate cement. Moreover, a tungsten carbide bur was a more efficient method in removing the residual resin cement and increased the bond strength of Panavia F2.0 cement after recementation.

Keywords

References

  1. Aglietta M, Siciliano VI, Zwahlen M, Bragger U, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, Salvi GE. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:441-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01706.x
  2. Botelho MG, Ma X, Cheung GJ, Law RK, Tai MT, Lam WY. Long-term clinical evaluation of 211 two-unit cantilevered resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. J Dent 2014;42:778-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.004
  3. Creugers NH, Kayser AF. An analysis of multiple failures of resin-bonded bridges. J Dent 1992;20:348-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(92)90023-6
  4. Durey KA, Nixon PJ, Robinson S, Chan MF. Resin bonded bridges: techniques for success. Br Dent J 2011;211:113-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.619
  5. Marinello CP, Kerschbaum T, Pfeiffer P, Reppel PD. Success rate experience after rebonding and renewal of resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:8-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90256-C
  6. Lally U. Resin-bonded fixed partial dentures past and present--an overview. J Ir Dent Assoc 2012-2013;58:294-300.
  7. Morgan C, Djemal S, Gilmour G. Predictable resin-bonded bridges in general dental practice. Dent Update 2001;28:501-6, 508. https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2001.28.10.501
  8. Tasar S, Ulusoy MM, Meric G. Microshear bond strength according to dentin cleansing methods before recementation. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:79-87. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.2.79
  9. Langer A, Ilie N. Dentin infiltration ability of different classes of adhesive systems. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:205-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0694-4
  10. Sol E, Espasa E, Boj JR, Canalda C. Effect of different prophylaxis methods on sealant adhesion. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2000;24:211-4.
  11. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. The effects of tooth preparation cleansing protocols on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to contaminated dentin. Oper Dent 2008;33: 556-63. https://doi.org/10.2341/07-141
  12. Sarac D, Bulucu B, Sarac YS, Kulunk S. The effect of dentincleaning agents on resin cement bond strength to dentin. J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:751-8. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0257
  13. Leirskar J, Nordbo H. The effect of zinc oxide-eugenol on the shear bond strength of a commonly used bonding system. Endod Dent Traumatol 2000;16:265-8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-9657.2000.016006265.x
  14. Prata RA, de Oliveira VP, de Menezes FC, Borges GA, de Andrade OS, Goncalves LS. Effect of 'Try-in' paste removal method on bond strength to lithium disilicate ceramic. J Dent 2011;39:863-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.09.011
  15. Santos MJ, Bapoo H, Rizkalla AS, Santos GC. Effect of dentincleaning techniques on the shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to dentin. Oper Dent 2011;36:512-20. https://doi.org/10.2341/10-392-L
  16. Grasso CA, Caluori DM, Goldstein GR, Hittelman E. In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:437-41. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.128123
  17. Gultz J, Kaim J, Scherer W. Treating enamel surfaces with a prepared pumice prophy paste prior to bonding. Gen Dent 1999;47:200-1.
  18. Duke ES, Phillips RW, Blumershine R. Effects of various agents in cleaning cut dentine. J Oral Rehabil 1985;12:295-302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1985.tb01284.x
  19. Bavbek AB, Goktas B, Sahinbas A, Ozcopur B, Eskitascioglu G, Ozcan M. Effect of different mechanical cleansing protocols of dentin for recementation procedures on micro-shear bond strength of conventional and self-adhesive resin cements. Int J Adhes Adhes 2013;41:107-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.10.012
  20. Button GL, Moon PC, Barnes RF, Gunsolley JC. Effect of preparation cleaning procedures on crown retention. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:145-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90004-2
  21. Feitosa VP, Ogliari FA, Van Meerbeek B, Watson TF, Yoshihara K, Ogliari AO, Sinhoreti MA, Correr AB, Cama G, Sauro S. Can the hydrophilicity of functional monomers affect chemical interaction? J Dent Res 2014;93:201-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034513514587
  22. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011;27:17-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.023
  23. Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Nagaoka N, Fukegawa D, Hayakawa S, Mine A, Nakamura M, Minagi S, Osaka A, Suzuki K, Van Meerbeek B. Nano-controlled molecular interaction at adhesive interfaces for hard tissue reconstruction. Acta Biomater 2010;6:3573-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2010.03.024
  24. Nikaido T, Ichikawa C, Li N, Takagaki T, Sadr A, Yoshida Y, Suzuki K, Tagami J. Effect of functional monomers in all-inone adhesive systems on formation of enamel/dentin acidbase resistant zone. Dent Mater J 2011;30:576-82. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2010-214
  25. Fukuda R, Yoshida Y, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Inoue S, Sano H, Suzuki K, Shintani H, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding efficacy of polyalkenoic acids to hydroxyapatite, enamel and dentin. Biomaterials 2003;24:1861-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(02)00575-6
  26. Ozturk E, Bolay S, Hickel R, Ilie N. Shear bond strength of porcelain laminate veneers to enamel, dentine and enameldentine complex bonded with different adhesive luting systems. J Dent 2013;41:97-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.04.005
  27. Boyer DB, Hormati AA. Rebonding composite resin to enamel at sites of fracture. Oper Dent 1980;5:102-6.
  28. Leas TJ, Hondrum S. The effect of rebonding on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets-a comparison of two clinical techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993; 103:200-1.
  29. Montasser MA, Drummond JL, Evans CA. Rebonding of orthodontic brackets. Part I, a laboratory and clinical study. Angle Orthod 2008;78:531-6. https://doi.org/10.2319/022307-90.1
  30. Eminkahyagil N, Arman A, Cetinsahin A, Karabulut E. Effect of resin-removal methods on enamel and shear bond strength of rebonded brackets. Angle Orthod 2006;76:314-21.
  31. Bishara SE, VonWald L, Laffoon JF, Warren JJ. The effect of repeated bonding on the shear bond strength of a composite resin orthodontic adhesive. Angle Orthod 2000;70:435-41.
  32. Wright WL, Powers JM. In vitro tensile bond strength of reconditioned brackets. Am J Orthod 1985;87:247-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(85)90046-6
  33. Jassem HA, Retief DH, Jamison HC. Tensile and shear strengths of bonded and rebonded orthodontic attachments. Am J Orthod 1981;79:661-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(81)90358-4
  34. Thomas BW, Hook CR, Draughn RA. Laser-aided degradation of composite resin. Angle Orthod 1996;66:281-6.
  35. Yap AU, Shah KC, Loh ET, Sim SS, Tan CC. Influence of eugenol-containing temporary restorations on bond strength of composite to dentin. Oper Dent 2001;26:556-61.
  36. Blixt M, Adamczak E, Linden LA, Oden A, Arvidson K. Bonding to densely sintered alumina surfaces: effect of sandblasting and silica coating on shear bond strength of luting cements. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:221-6.
  37. Fonseca RB, Martins LR, Quagliatto PS, Soares CJ. Influence of provisional cements on ultimate bond strength of indirect composite restorations to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:225-30.
  38. Zachrisson BU, Arthun J. Enamel surface appearance after various debonding techniques. Am J Orthod 1979;75:121-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(79)90181-7
  39. Lohbauer U, Nikolaenko SA, Petschelt A, Frankenberger R. Resin tags do not contribute to dentin adhesion in self-etching adhesives. J Adhes Dent 2008;10:97-103.
  40. Toledano M, Osorio R, Perdigao J, Rosales JI, Thompson JY, Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA. Effect of acid etching and collagen removal on dentin wettability and roughness. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;47:198-203. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199911)47:2<198::AID-JBM9>3.0.CO;2-L
  41. Ayad MF, Rosenstiel SF, Hassan MM. Surface roughness of dentin after tooth preparation with different rotary instrumentation. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:122-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90087-6
  42. Peumans M, De Munck J, Fieuws S, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G, Van Meerbeek B. A prospective ten-year clinical trial of porcelain veneers. J Adhes Dent 2004;6:65-76.

Cited by

  1. The contribution of ceramic thickness and adhesive type on the de-bonding strength of dental ceramic veneers using Er,Cr:YSGG laser. vol.8, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.17126/joralres.2019.021
  2. Evaluation of rebonding strengths of leucite and lithium disilicate veneers debonded with an Er:YAG laser vol.35, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-019-02872-8