• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.165-176
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The effects of desensitizing agent are often for a short duration. One of the reasons is believed to be wear of desensitizing agent by tooth brushing. To reduce the wear and make the duration longer, dental bonding resin was applied and the changes of dentin permeability after toothbrushing were measured. Materials and methods: Extracted teeth free from caries were chosen. Coronal dentin discs with thickness of 1 mm were prepared. Using the split chamber device developed by Pashely, hydraulic conductance and scanning electron microscope images (SEM) were compared and contrasted before and immediately after the application of desensitizing agent and bonding resin and then after equivalent tooth brushing of 1 week, 2 weeks, and 6 weeks. Four commercially available desensitizing agents were used in this study; they were All-Bond 2, Seal & Protect, Gluma, and MS Coat. And Dentin/Enamel Bonding resin (Bisco Inc.) was used. The results of this study are as follows. Results: On all specimens, the hydraulic conductance decreased after the application of tooth desensitizing agent and bonding resin. Compared with the specimens treated only with desensitizer, the specimens treated with All-Bond 2, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had a little increase in hydraulic conductance after 1, 2 and 6-week tooth brushing. In case of Seal & Protect, the specimens showed the same result only after 6-week tooth brushing. On examination of SEM, the dentinal tubule diameter had decreased after treatment of desensitizing agents and bonding resin. And the specimens treated with All-Bond2, Seal&Protect, Gluma, MS Coat and plus D/E bonding resin had an significant decrease in diameter of dentinal tubule after 6-week tooth brushing. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it is effective to use bonding resin after application of desensitizer in reducing the wear by tooth brushing and making the duration longer. In this study, just 6-week tooth brushing was performed, and it is not enough to regard it as a long-term data. So further study is needed and more perfect method for treating dentin hypersensitivity should be developed.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.223-231
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a desensitizer on dentinal bond strength in cementation of composite resin inlay. Fifty four molar teeth were exposed the occlusal dentin. Class I inlay cavities were prepared and randomly divided into six groups. Control group: no agent, Group 1 : Isodan, Group 2 : One-step, Group 3 : All-Bond SE, Group 4 : Isodan + One-step, Group 5 : Isodan + All-Bond SE. Desensitizing agent and dentin bonding agents were applied immediately after the completion of the preparations. Impressions were then made. The composite resin inlays (Tescera, Bisco) were fabricated according to the manufacturers' guidelines. Cementation procedures followed a standard protocol by using resin cement (Bis-Cem, Bisco). Specimens were stored in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 24 hours. All specimens were sectioned to obtained sticks with $1.0{\times}1.0\;mm^2$ cross sectional area. The microtensile bond strength (${\mu}TBS$) was tested at crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The data was analyzed using one way ANOVA and Tukey's test. Scanning electron microscopy analysis was made to examine the details of the bonding interface, 1. Group 1 showed significantly lower ${\mu}TBS$ than other groups (p<0.05). 2. There was no significant difference between the ${\mu}TBS$ of Group 3 and Group 5. 3. The ${\mu}TBS$ of Group 4 showed significantly lower than that of Group 2 (p<0.05). In conclusion, a desensitizer (Isodan) might have an adverse effect on the bond strength of composite resin inlay to dentin.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.5
• /
• pp.528-534
• /
• 2008

Purpose: Marginal fit is one of the important components for the successful prosthodontic restoration. Poor fitting margin of the restoration causes hypersensitivity, secondary caries, and plaque accumulation, which later result in prosthodontic failure. CAD/CAM zirconia all-ceramic restorations, such as $LAVA^{(R)}$ (3M ESPE, St.Paul, MN) and $EVEREST^{(R)}$ (KaVo Dental GmbH, Biberach, Germany) systems were recently introduced in Korea. It is clinically meaningful to evaluate the changes of the marginal fit of the CAD/CAM zirconia systems before and after build-up. The purposes of this study are to compare the marginal fit of the two CAD/CAM all-ceramic systems with that of the ceramometal restoration, before and after porcelain build-up Material and methods: A maxillary first premolar dentiform tooth was prepared with 2.0 mm occlusal reduction, 1.0 mm axial reduction, chamfer margin, and 6 degree taperness in the axial wall. The prepared dentiform die was duplicated into the metal abutment die. The metal die was placed in the dental study model, and the full arch impressions of the model were made. Twenty four copings of 3 groups which were $LAVA^{(R)}$, $EVEREST^{(R)}$, and ceramometal restorations were fabricated. Each coping was cemented on the metal die with color-mixed Fit-checker $II^{(R)}$ (GC Cor., Tokyo, Japan). The marginal opening of each coping was measured with $Microhiscope^{(R)}$ system (HIROX KH-1000 ING-Plus, Seoul, Korea. X300 magnification). After porcelain build-up, the marginal openings of $LAVA^{(R)}$, $EVEREST^{(R)}$,and ceramometal restorations were also evaluated in the same method. Statistical analysis was done with paired t-test and one-way ANOVA test. Results: In coping states, the mean marginal opening for $EVEREST^{(R)}$ restorations was $52.00{\pm}11.94\;{\mu}m$ for $LAVA^{(R)}$ restorations $56.97{\pm}10.00\;{\mu}m$, and for ceramometal restorations $97.38{\pm}18.54\;{\mu}m$. After porcelain build-up, the mean marginal opening for $EVEREST^{(R)}$ restorations was $61.69{\pm}19.33\;{\mu}m$, for $LAVA^{(R)}$ restorations $70.81{\pm}12.99\;{\mu}m$, and for ceramometal restorations $1115.25{\pm}23.86\;{\mu}m$. Conclusion: 1. $LAVA^{(R)}$ and $EVEREST^{(R)}$ restorations in comparison with ceramometal restorations showed better marginal fit, which had significant differences (P < 0.05) in coping state and also after porcelain build-up . 2. The mean marginal opening values between $LAVA^{(R)}$ and $EVEREST^{(R)}$ restorations did not showed significant differences after porcelain build-up as well as in coping state (P > .05). 3. $EVEREST^{(R)}$, $LAVA^{(R)}$ and ceramometal restorations showed a little increased marginal opening after porcelain build-up, but did not show any statistical significance (P > .05).