• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.283-293
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of dual bonding technique by comparing microshear bond strength between two different luting methods of resin cement to tooth dentin. Three dentin bonding systems(All-Bond 2, One-Step, Clearfil SE Bond), two temporary cements (Propac, Freegenol) were used in this study. In groups used conventional luting procedure, dentin surfaces were left untreated. In groups used dual bonding technique, three dentin bonding systems were applied to each dentin surface. All specimens were covered with each temporary cement. The temporary cements were removed and each group was treated using one of three different dentin bonding system. A resin cement was applied to the glass cylinder surface and the cylinder was bonded to the dentin surface. Then, micro-shear bond strength test was performed. For the evaluation of the morphology at the resin/dentin interface, SEM examination was also performed. 1. Conventional luting procedure showed higher micro-shear bond strengths than dual boning technique. However, there were no significant differences. 2. Freegenol showed higher micro-shear bond strengths than Propac, but there were no significant differences. 3. In groups used dual bonding technique, SE Bond showed significantly higher micro-shear bond strengths in One-Step and All-Bond 2 (p<0.05), but there was no significant difference between One-Step and All-Bond 2. 4. In SEM observation, with the use of All-Bond 2 and One-Step, very long and numerous resin tags were observed. This study suggests that there were no findings that the dual bonding technique would be better than the conventional luting procedure.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.5
• /
• pp.535-543
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare the bonding characteristics of a new self-adhesive resin cement to dentin, which does not require bonding and conditioning procedure of the tooth surface, and conventional resin cement. The effect of phosphoric acid etching prior to application of self-adhesive resin cement on the shear bond strength was also evaluated. Material and methods: Fortyfive non-carious human adult molars extracted within 6 months were embedded in chemically cured acrylic resin. The teeth were ground with a series of SiC-papers ending with 800 grit until the flat dentin surfaces of the teeth were exposed. The teeth were randomly divided into 3 experimental groups. In group 1, self-adhesive resin cement, RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) was bonded without any conditioning of teeth. In group 2, RelyX Unicem was bonded to teeth after phosphoric acid etching. For group 3, Syntac Primer (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) was applied to the teeth before Syntac adhesive (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and Helibond (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein) followed by conventional resin cement, Variolink II (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein). To make a shear bond strength test model, a plastic tuble (3 mm diameter, 3 mm height) was applied to the dentin surfaces at a right angle and filled it with respective resin cement, and light-polymerized for 40 seconds. All the specimens were stored in distilled water at $37^{\circ}C$ for 24 hours before test. Universal Testing Machine (Z020, Zwick, Ulm, Germany) at a cross head speed of 1 mm/min was used to evaluate the shear bond strength. The failure sites were inspected under a magnifier and Scanning Electron Microscope. The data was analyzed with One way ANOVA and Scheffe test at ${\alpha}$= 0.05. Results: (1) The shear bond strengths to dentin of RelyX Unicem was not significantly different from those of Variolink II/Syntac. (2) Phosphoric acid etching lowered the shear bond strength of RelyX Unicem significantly. (3) Most of RelyX Unicem and Variolink II showed mixed fractures, while all the specimens of RelyX Unicem with phosphoric acid etching demonstrated adhesive failure between dentin and resin cement. Conclusion: Shear bond strength to dentin of self-adhesive resin cement is not significantly different from conventional resin cement, and phosphoric acid etching decrease the shear bond strength to dentin of self-adhesive resin cement.

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.235-237
• /
• 2001

;Dentistry has benefited from tremendous advances in technology with the introduction of new techniques and materials, and patients are aware that esthetic approaches in dentistry can change one's appearance. Increasingly. tooth-colored restorative materials have been used for restoration of posterior teeth. Tooth-colored restoration for posterior teeth can be divided into three categories: 1) the direct techniques that can be made in a single appointment and are an intraoral procedure utilizing composites: 2) the semidirect techniques that require both an intraoral and an extraoral procedure and are luted chairside utilizing composites: and 3) the indirect techniques that require several appointments and the expertise of a dental technician working with either composites or ceramics. But, resin restoration has inherent drawbacks of microleakage. polymerization shrinkage, thermal cycling problems. and wear in stress-bearing areas. On the other hand, Ceramic restorations have many advantages over resin restorations. Ceramic inlays are reported to have less leakage than resin restoration and to fit better. although marginal fidelity depends on technique and is laboratory dependent. Adhesion of luting resin is more reliable and durable to etched ceramic material than to treated resin composite. In view of color matching, periodontal health. resistance to abrasion, ceramic restoration is superior to resin restorationl. Materials which have been used for the fabrication of ceramic restorations are various. Conventional powder slurry ceramics are also available. Castable ceramics are produced by centrifugal casting of heat-treated glass ceramics. and machinable ceramics are feldspathic porcelains or cast glass ceramics which are milled using a CAD/CAM apparatus to produce inlays (for example, Cered. They may also be copy milled using the Celay apparatus. Pressable ceramics are produced from feldspathic porcelain which is supplied in ingot form and heated and moulded under pressure to produce a restoration. Infiltrated ceramics are another class of material which are available for use as ceramic inlays. An example is $In-Ceram^{\circledR}$(Vident. California, USA) which consists of a porous aluminum oxide or spinell core infiltrated with glass and subsequently veneered with feldspathic porcelain. In the 1980s. the development of compatible refractory materials made fabrication easier. and the development of adhesive resin cements greatly improved clinical success rates. This case report presents esthetic ceramic inlays for posterior teeth.teeth.