• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.305-311
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. Over the past years, the adhesion of fiber posts luted with simplified adhesive systems has been a matter of great interest. The aim of this study was to assess the post retentive potential of a self-adhesive resin cement using different adhesive systems to compare the push-out bond strengths of fiber posts. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The post spaces of 56 mandibular premolar roots were prepared and divided into 4 experimental groups and further divided into 2 subgroups according to testing time (n=7). The fiber posts (Rely X Fiber Post) were luted with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem) and one of the following adhesive systems: no adhesive, a total-etch adhesive resin (Single Bond), a two-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil SE Bond) and a one-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil S3 Bond). Each root was cut horizontally, and 1.5 mm thick six root segments were prepared. Push-out tests were performed after one week or three months (0.5 mm/min). Statistical analysis were performed with three-way ANOVA (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. Cervical root segments showed higher bond strength values than middle segments. Adhesive application increased the bond strength. For one week group, the total-etch adhesive resin Single Bond showed higher bond strength than the self-adhesive resin cement RelyX Unicem applied without adhesive resin at middle region. For 3 months group, the two-step self-etch adhesive resin Clearfil SE Bond showed the highest bond strength for both regions. Regarding the time considered, Clearfil SE Bond 3 months group showed higher bond strength values than one week group. CONCLUSION. Using the adhesive resins in combination with the self-adhesive resin cement improves the bond strengths. The bond strength values of two-step self-etch adhesive resin Clearfil SE Bond improved as time passes.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.178-186
• /
• 2015

Dental polymer-based luting materials are classified into esthetic resin cement, adhesive resin cement and self-adhesive resin cement. Due to the different component of each type of resin cement, the preconditioning method of tooth surface and the steps are different from each type of resin cement. The pre-treatment of adherend (ceramic, resin and metal) surface also varies with the type of resin cement and the manufacturer. In this study, the characteristics of each type of resin cement, mechanical properties, indication and advantages were investigated. Through these, clinical tips on using resin cements were suggested.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.12-16
• /
• 2014

Objectives: Extensively destroyed teeth are commonly restored with composite resin before cavity preparation for indirect restorations. The longevity of the restoration can be related to the proper bonding of the resin cement to the composite. This study aimed to evaluate the microshear bond strength of two self-adhesive resin cements to composite resin. Material and Methods: Composite discs were subject to one of six different surface pretreatments: none (control), 35% phosphoric acid etching for 30 seconds (PA), application of silane (silane), PA + silane, PA + adhesive, or PA + silane + adhesive (n = 6). A silicone mold containing a cylindrical orifice ($1mm^2$ diameter) was placed over the composite resin. RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE) or BisCem (Bisco Inc.) self-adhesive resin cement was inserted into the orifices and light-cured. Self-adhesive cement cylinders were submitted to shear loading. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05). Results: Independent of the cement used, the PA + Silane + Adhesive group showed higher microshear bond strength than those of the PA and PA + Silane groups. There was no difference among the other treatments. Unicem presented higher bond strength than BisCem for all experimental conditions. Conclusions: Pretreatments of the composite resin surface might have an effect on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to this substrate.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.5 no.3
• /
• pp.226-233
• /
• 2013

PURPOSE. This study evaluated the adhesion of 10-MDP containing self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements to dentin with and without the use of etch-and-rinse technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Human third molars (N=180) were randomly divided into 6 groups (n=30 per group). Conventional (Panavia F2.0, Kuraray-PAN) and self-adhesive resin cements (Clearfil SA, Kuraray-CSA) were bonded to dentin surfaces either after application of 3-step etch-and-rinse (35% $H_3PO_4$ + ED Primer) or two-step self-etch adhesive resin (Clearfil SE Bond). Specimens were subjected to shear bond strength test using the universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min). The failure types were analyzed using a stereomicroscope and quality of hybrid layer was observed under a scanning electron microscope. The data (MPa) were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (${\alpha}$=.05). RESULTS. Overall, PAN adhesive cement showed significantly higher mean bond strength ($12.5{\pm}2.3-14.1{\pm}2.4$ MPa) than CSA cement ($9.3{\pm}1.4-13.9{\pm}1.9$ MPa) (P<.001). Adhesive failures were more frequent in CSA cement groups when used in conjunction with two-step self-adhesive (68%) or no adhesive at all (66%). Hybrid layer quality was inferior in CSA compared to PAN cement in all conditions. CONCLUSION. In clinical situations where bonding to dentin substrate is crucial, both conventional and self-adhesive resin cements based on 10-MDP can benefit from etch-and-rinse technique to achieve better quality of adhesion in the early clinical period.

• 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.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.88-95
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if pre-treatment with desensitizers have a negative effect on microtensile bond strength before cementing a restoration using recently introduced self-adhesive resin cement to dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-five human molars' occlusal surfaces were ground to expose dentin; and were randomly grouped as (n=5); 1) Gluma-(Glutaraldehyde/HEMA) 2) Aqua-Prep F-(Fluoride), 3) Bisblock-(Oxalate), 4) Cervitec Plus-(Clorhexidine), 5) Smart protect-(Triclosan), 6) Nd:YAG laser, 7) No treatment (control). After applying the selected agent, RelyX U200 self-adhesive resin cement was used to bond composite resin blocks to dentin. All groups were subjected to thermocycling for 1000 cycles between $5-55^{\circ}C$. Each bonded specimen was sectioned to microbars ($6mm{\times}1mm{\times}1mm$) (n=20). Specimens were submitted to microtensile bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Levene's test, Kruskal-Wallis One-way Analysis of Variance, and Conover's nonparametric statistical analysis were used (P<.05). RESULTS. Gluma, Smart Protect and Nd:YAG laser treatments showed comparable microtensile bond strengths compared with the control group (P>.05). The microtensile bond strengths of Aqua-Prep F, and Cervitec Plus were similar to each other but significantly lower than the control group (P<.05). Bisblock showed the lowest microtensile bond strength among all groups (P<.001). Most groups showed adhesive failure. CONCLUSION. Within the limitation of this study, it is not recommended to use Aqua-prep F, Cervitec Plus and Bisblock on dentin when used with a self-adhesive resin cement due to the decrease they cause in bond strength. Beside, pre-treatment of dentin with Gluma, Smart protect, and Nd:YAG laser do not have a negative effect.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.184-191
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physical properties of different self-adhesive resin cements and their shear bond strength on dentin and lithium disilicate ceramic and compare these result with that of conventional resin cement. For this study, four self-adhesive resin cements (Rely-X Unicem, Embrace Wetbond, Mexcem, BisCem), one conventional resin cement (Rely-X ARC) and one restorative resin composite (Z-350) were used. In order to evaluate the physical properties, compressive strength, diametral tensile strength and flexural strength were measured. To evaluate the shear bond strength on dentin, each cement was adhered to buccal dentinal surface of extracted human lower molars. Dentin bonding agent was applied after acid etching for groups of Rely-X ARC and Z-350. In order to evaluate the shear bond strength on ceramic, lithium disilicate glass ceramic (IPS Empress 2) disks were prepared. Only Rely-X ARC and Z-350 groups were pretreated with hydrofluoric acid and silane. And then each resin cement was adhered to ceramic surface in 2 mm diameter. Physical properties and shear bond strengths were measured using a universal testing machine. Results were as follows 1. BisCem showed the lowest compressive strength, diametral tensile strength and flexural strength. (P<0.05) 2. Self-adhesive resin cements showed significantly lower shear bond strength on the dentin and lithium disilicate ceramic than Rely-X ARC and Z-350 (P<0.05) In conclusion, self-adhesive resin cements represent the lower physical properties and shear bond strength than a conventional resin cement.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.249-256
• /
• 2015

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of atmospheric plasma (APL) versus conventional surface treatments on the adhesion of self-adhesive resin cement to Ti-6Al-4V alloy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty plates of machined titanium (Ti) discs were divided into five groups (n=12): 1) Untreated (CNT); 2) Sandblasted (SAB); 3) Tribochemically treated (ROC); 4) Tungsten CarbideBur (TCB); 5) APL treated (APL). SEM analysis and surface roughness (Ra) measurements were performed. Self-adhesive resin cement was bonded to the Ti surfaces and shear bond strength (SBS) tests, Ra and failure mode examinations were carried out. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance and chi-squared test. RESULTS. The lowest SBS value was obtained with CNT and was significantly different from all other groups except for APL. The ROC showed the highest SBS and Ra values of all the groups. CONCLUSION. It was concluded that the effect of APL on SBS and Ra was not sufficient and it may not be a potential for promoting adhesion to titanium.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.437-444
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physical properties of different automixing resin cements and the shear bond strength on dentin. For this study, two self-adhesive automixing resin cement(Rely-X Unicem(3M ESPE, St. Paul, USA), Embrace resin cement(Pulpdent, Oakland, USA)) and one chemical polymerizing resin cement(Resiment Ready-Mix(J.L.Blosser Inc., Liberty Missouri, USA)) were used. To evaluate the physical properties, compressive strength, diametral tensile strength and flexural strength were measured. The specimens were fabricated using Teflon mould according to manufacturers' instructions and stored for 24 hours in an atmosphere of 100% humidity. To evaluate the shear bond strength on dentin, each cements were adhered to buccal dentinal surface of extracted human lower molars in 2mm diameter. Physical properties and shear bond strengths were measured using universal testing machine(Z010, Zwick GmbH, Ulm, Germany) at a crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min. The physical properties and shear bond strength of different automixing resin cements were statistically analyzed and compared between groups using One-way ANOVA test and Schffe post-hoc test at the 95% level of confidence. The result shows that chemical polymerizing automixing resin cement represents the relatively higher physical properties and shear bond strength than self-adhesive automixing resin cements.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.7 no.4
• /
• pp.317-322
• /
• 2015

PURPOSE. The aim was to evaluate the effect of curing mode and different dentin surface pretreatment on microtensile bond strength (${\mu}TBS$) of self-adhesive resin cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-six extracted human permanent molars were sectioned horizontally exposing flat dentin surface. The teeth were divided into 12 groups (3 teeth/group) according to the dentin surface pretreatment methods (control, 18% EDTA, 10% Polyacrylic acid) and curing mode (self-curing vs. light-curing) of cement. After pretreatment, composite resin blocks were cemented with the following: (a) G-CEM LinkAce; (b) RelyX U200, followed by either self-curing or light-curing. After storage, the teeth were sectioned and ${\mu}TBS$ test was performed using a microtensile testing machine. The data was statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, Student T-test and Scheffe's post-hoc test at P<.05 level. RESULTS. For G-CEM LinkAce cement groups, polyacrylic acid pretreatment showed the highest ${\mu}TBS$ in the self-cured group. In the light-cured group, no significant improvements were observed according to the dentin surface pretreatment. There were no significant differences between curing modes. Both dentin surface pretreatment methods helped to increase the ${\mu}TBS$ of RelyX U200 resin cement significantly and degree of pretreatment effect was similar. No significant differences were found regarding curing modes except control groups. In the comparisons of two self-adhesive resin cements, all groups within the same pretreatment and curing mode were significantly different excluding self-cured control groups. CONCLUSION. Selecting RelyX U200 used in this study and application of dentin surface pretreatment with EDTA and polyacrylic acid might be recommended to enhance the bond strength of cement to dentin.