Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회지)

Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Difference in Bonding Strength of RMGIC according to Type of Hemostatic Agent in Primary Tooth

지혈제의 종류에 따른 레진 강화형 글라스아이오노머 시멘트 결합력의 차이

  • Back, Seolah (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Lee, Joonhaeng (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Jongbin (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Han, Miran (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Jong Soo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 백설아 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 이준행 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김종빈 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 한미란 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김종수 (단국대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실)
  • Received : 2021.08.31
  • Accepted : 2021.10.19
  • Published : 2021.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of the hemostatic agent containing aluminum chloride with hemostatic agent containing ferric sulfate on the shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cement(RMGIC) to dentin in primary tooth. Twenty extracted non-carious human primary teeth were collected in this study. The specimens were cut to expose dentin and polished. The specimens were randomly seperated into 3 groups for treatment; group I: polyacrylic acid(PAA), RMGIC; group II: aluminum chloride, PAA, RMGIC; group III: ferric sulfate, PAA, RMGIC Ten specimens from each group were subjected to shear bond strength test. The mean shear bond strength of each group was as follows: 10.07 ± 1.83 MPa in Group I, 7.62 ± 0.78 MPA in group II, 5.23 ± 0.78 MPa in group III. There were significant differences among all groups(p < 0.001). In conclusion, both aluminum chloride hemostatic agent and ferric sulfate hemostatic agent decreased the shear bond strength of RMGIC to dentin. And ferric sulfate hemostatic agent decreased the shear bond strength of RMGIC more than the aluminium chloride hemostatic agent.

이 연구의 목적은 유치의 상아질면에서 염화알루미늄 지혈제와 황화철 지혈제의 적용이 레진강화형 글라스아이오노머(RMGIC)의 결합에 미치는 영향을 전단결합강도를 통하여 평가하는 것이다. 20개의 우식이 없는 유구치가 이용되었으며 상아질이 노출되도록 시편을 제작하여 지혈제의 종류에 따라 3개의 군으로 분류하였다. I군은 치면에 25% polyacrylic acid(PAA)를 10초간 사용한 군, II군은 21.3% 염화알루미늄 지혈제를 1분간 사용한 뒤 PAA를 10초간 적용한 군, III군은 20% 황화철 지혈제를 1분간 사용한 뒤 PAA를 10초간 적용한 군으로 설정하였다. 각 군당 10개의 시편에 RMGIC를 중합하여 전단결합강도를 측정하였다. 결합강도는 I군이 10.07 ± 1.83 MPa, 2군에서 7.62 ± 0.78 MPa, 3군에서 5.23 ± 0.78 MPa였다. 모든 군의 결합강도는 유의한 차이를 보였다. 이 연구를 통해 염화알루미늄 지혈제, 황화철 지혈제 모두 상아질에서 RMGIC의 전단결합강도를 감소시키며 황화철 지혈제가 염화알루미늄 지혈제보다 RMGIC의 전단 결합강도를 더 많이 감소시키는 것을 알 수 있었다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The Department of Dentistry(Pediatric dentistry) was supported through the Research-Focused Department Promotion Project as a part of the University Innovation Support Program for Dankook University in 2021.

References

  1. Lacy AM, Young DA : Modern concepts and materials for the pediatric dentist. Pediatric Dent, 18:469-478, 1996.
  2. Woycheshin FF : An evaluation of the drugs used for gingival retraction. J Prosthet Dent, 14:769-776, 1964. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(64)90213-6
  3. Santos VR, Lucchesi JA, Duarte PM, et al. : Effects of glass ionomer and microfilled composite subgingival restorations on periodontal tissue and subgingival biofilm: A 6-month evaluation. J Periodontol, 78:1522-1528, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2007.070032
  4. Mathewson RJ, Primosch RE : Fundamentals of pediatric dentistry, 3rd ed. Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc, Illinois, 79, 1995.
  5. Martingnon S, Tellez M, Ekstrand KR, et al. : Sealing distal proximal caries lesions in first primary molars: Efficacy after 2.5 years. Caries Res, 44:562-570, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1159/000321986
  6. Moynihan P, Petersen PE : Nutrition and the prevention of dental diseases. Public Health Nutr, 7:201-226, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1079/PHN2003589
  7. Gernberg GR, Bakdash MB, Keenan KM : Relationship between proximal tooth open contacts and periodontal desease. J Periodontol, 54:529-533, 1983. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1983.54.9.529
  8. Appukuttan DP : Strategies to manage patients with dental anxiety and dental phobia: literature review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent, 8:35-50, 2016. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S63626
  9. Colak H, Dulgergil CT, Hamidi MM et al. : Early childhood caries update: A review of causes, diagnoses, and treatments. J Nat Sci Biol Med, 4:29-38, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.107257
  10. Tachibana A, Castanho GM, Matos AB, et al. : Influence of blood contamination on bond strength of a self-etching adhesive to dental tissues. J Adhes Dent, 13:349-358, 2011.
  11. Shahram FE, Niloofar S, Arezoo A : Effect of ferric sulfate contamination on the bonding effectiveness of etch-andrinse and self-etch adhesives to superficial dentin, J Conserv Dent, 16:126-130, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.108190
  12. Pardis T, Marayama K : A review on common chemical hemostatic agents in restorative dentistry. Dent Res J, 11:423-428, 2014.
  13. Palm MD, Altman JS : Topical hemostatic agents: a review. Dermatol Surg, 34:431-445, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1097/00042728-200804000-00001
  14. Land MF, Couri CC, Johnston WM : Smear layer instability caused by hemostatic agents. J Prosthet Dent, 76:477-482, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90004-9
  15. Tarighi P, Khoroushi M : A review on common chemical hemostatic agents in restorative dentistry. Denl Res J, 11:423-428, 2014.
  16. Woody RD, Miller A, Staffanou RS : Review of the pH of hemostatic agents used in tissue displacement. J Prosthet Dent, 70:191-192, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(93)90018-J
  17. Larson PO : Topical hemostatic agents for dermatologic surgery. J Dermatol Surg Oncol, 14:623-632, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.1988.tb03390.x
  18. Madhuri B, Sreekanth KM, Sivakumar N : Clinical applications of ferric sulfate in dentistry: A narrative review. J Conserv Dent, 20:278-281, 2017. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_259_16
  19. Ajami AA, Kahnamoii MA, Bahari M, et al. : Effect of three different contamination removal methods on bond strength of a self-etching adhesive to dentin contaminated with an aluminum chloride hemostatic agent. J Contemp Dent Pract, 14:26-33, 2013. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1264
  20. Kuphasuk W, Harnirattisai C, Tagami J, et al. : Bond strengths of two adhesive systems to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic agent. Oper Dent, 32:399-405, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2341/06-121
  21. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois J : The effect of tooth-preparation cleansing protocol on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic agent. Oper Dent, 36:18-26, 2011. https://doi.org/10.2341/09-308-LR1
  22. Maryam H, Haleh H, Seyedeh, et al. : Effect of hemostatic agent on microshear bond strength of total-etch and selfetch adhesives systems. Dent Res J, 16:361-365, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.270781
  23. Hussainy SN, Nasim I, Ranjan M : Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement, flowable composite, and polyacid-modified resin composite in noncarious cervical lesions: One-year follow-up. J Conserv Dent, 21:510- 515, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd_51_18
  24. Lin A, McIntyre N, Davidson R : Studies on the adhesion of glass-ionomer cements to dentin. J Dent Res, 71:1836- 1841, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710111401
  25. Coutinho E, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B, et al. : Development of a self-etch adhesive for resin-modified glass ionomers. J Dent Res, 85:349-353, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910608500413
  26. Park EY, Kang S : Current aspects and prospects of glass ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. Yeungnam Univ J Med, 37:169-178, 2020. https://doi.org/10.12701/yujm.2020.00374
  27. Khoroushi M, Shirazi MH, Keshani F, et al. : Composite resin bond strength to caries affected dentin contaminated with 3 different hemostatic agents. Gen Dent, 64:e11-15, 2016.
  28. Saad A, Inoue G, Tagami J, et al. : Effect of dentin contamination with two hemostatic agents on bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cement with different conditioning. Dent Mater J, 38:257-263, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2018-059
  29. Ayo-Yusuf OA, Driessen CH, Botha AJ, et al. : SEM-EDX study of prepared human dentine surfaces exposed to gingival retraction fluids. J Dent, 33:731-739, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.02.002
  30. Harnirattisai C, Kuphasuk W, Senawongse P, Tagami J, et al. : Bond strengths of resin cements to astringent-contaminated dentin. Oper Dent, 34:415-422, 2009. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-107
  31. Gonzalez C : Effect of three different contamination removal methods on bond strength of ceramic to enamel contaminated with aluminium chloride and ferric sufate. NSUWorks, 2018.
  32. Pucci CR, Araujo RM, Feitosa FA, et al. : Effects of contamination by hemostatic agents and use of cleaning agent on etch-and-rinse dentin bond strength. J Braz Dent, 27:688- 692, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600685
  33. Araujo IS, Prado CJ, Silva GR, et al. : Influence of hemostatic solution on bond strength and physicochemical properties of resin cement. J Am Dent Assoc, 145:1120-1128, 2010. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.2014.84
  34. Sung EC, Tai ET, Caputo AA, et al. : Effect of irrigation solutions on dentin bonding agents and restorative shear bond strength. J Prosthet Dent, 8:628-632, 2002.
  35. Bernades KO, Hilgert LA, Pereira PNR et al. : The influence of hemostatic agents on dentin and enamel surfaces and dental bonding. JADA, 145:1120-1127, 2014.
  36. Khoroushi M, Shirazi MH, Keshani F, et al. : Composite resin bond strength to caries-affected dentin contaminated with 3 different hemostatic agents. Gen Dent, 64:e11-15, 2016.
  37. Martin RB : The chemistry of aluminum as related to biology and medicine. Clin Chem, 32:1797-1806, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/32.10.1797
  38. O'Keefe KL, Pinzon LM, Powerss JM, et al. : Bond strength of composite to astringent-contaminated dentin using selfetching adhesives. Am J Dent, 18:168-172, 2005.