EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONAL ETCHING PROCEDURE ON PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH OF ONE-STEP RESIN CEMENT

Soon-Il Kang; Jeong-Kil Park; Bock Hur; Hyeon-Cheol Kim

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.5.443

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 33(5); 2008 > Article

Original Article EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONAL ETCHING PROCEDURE ON PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH OF ONE-STEP RESIN CEMENT: Soon-Il Kang, Jeong-Kil Park, Bock Hur, Hyeon-Cheol Kim^,*; J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2008;33(5):-451.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.5.443
Published online: January 14, 2008

Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University

*Corresponding Author: Hyeon-Cheol Kim, Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, 1-10, Ami-Dong, Seo-Gu, Busan, 602-739, Korea, Tel: 82-51-240-7978 E-mail: golddent@pusan.ac.kr

• Received: July 2, 2008 • Revised: August 4, 2008 • Accepted: August 12, 2008

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

782 Views
1 Download
2 Crossref

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES
참고문헌

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of additional etching procedure prior to Maxcem resin cement application in indirect restoration cementation using push-out bonding strength.

One hundred and two extracted human molars were used to make indirect resin restorations of gold inlay and Synfony. These restorations were cemented using Maxcem and Variolink II. Additional etching procedures were done for one group with Maxcem. Three groups have 17 specimens in both restoration types. Push-out bond strength was measured using multi-purpose tester and calculated for bonding strength per sqaure-millimeter area. The mean bonding strength values were compared using SPSS 12.0K program for one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's Test with 95% significance.

Under the condition of this study, the additional etching procedure prior to usage of Maxcem resulted in reduced bond strength for both of restoration types.
Keywords: Bonding strength; Push-out bond strength; One-step bonding; Resin cement; Acid etching; Maxcem

Figure 1.

Specimen design and dimension (mm) and prepared tooth specimen.

Figure 2.

Push-out bond strength measuring device.

Figure 3.

Representatives of SEM examination of failure surfaces of A; GMC, B; GME, C; GVL, D; RMC, E; RME, and F; RVL.

Table 1.

Bonding systems used in this study

Brand of Resin cement	Adhesive system	Composition
Variolink II		Total Etch; 37% phosphoric acid
		Excite DSC; HEMA*, dimethacrylate, phosphonic
	Total-etching	acid acrylate, silicon dioxide
		Adhesive resin; Bis-GMA**, urethane
		dimethacrylate, filler

Maxcem		Base Paste; Uretanedimethacrylate,
	Self-etching	Camphoroquinone, Fluoroaluminosilicate, other
	&	Catalyst Paste; Bis-GMA**,
	Self-adhesive	Triethyleneglycoldimethacrylate,
		Glycerophosphatedimethacrylate, other

^*HEMA; Hydroxyethylmethacrylate

^**Bis-GMA; Bisphenol-A-glycidyldimethacrylate

Table 2.

Group classification and adhesive methods for each groups

Group	Type of restoration	Brand of cement	Procedure
Group GMC	Gold inlay	Maxcem	m.i
Group GME	Gold inlay	Maxcem	additional etching
Group GVL	Gold inlay	Variolink Ⅱ	m.i
Group RMC	Synfony	Maxcem	m.i
Group RME	Synfony	Maxcem	additional etching
Group RVL	Synfony	Variolink Ⅱ	m.i

m.i.; according to the manufacturer's instruction

Table 3.

Push-out bond strength (N/㎜²)

Group (n = 17)	Push-out bond strength (mean ± SD)	Statistic analysis (p < 0.05)
Group GMC	5.99 ± 2.12	AB
Group GME	4.41 ± 2.44	BC
Group GVL	7.14 ± 1.60	A
Group RMC	4.63 ± 1.82	B
Group RME	2.49 ± 1.61	C
Group RVL	7.13 ± 1.76	A

ABC; Significant difference between groups was indicated with different letters (p < 0.05).

REFERENCES

참고문헌

1. Kelsey WP, Triolo PT, Blankenau RJ, Kelsey MN, Chad O, Dan Hauser. Bond strength to enamel and dentin with indirect and direct resin composite. Am J Dent 9(3):105-108. 1996.PubMed
2. Gerard K. Direct and indirect adhesive restorative material: A review. Am J Dent 13:35-40. 2000.PubMed
3. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding: effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 25:324-330. 2000.PubMed
4. Mark YF, Lai SC, Cheung GS, Chan AW, Tay FR. Pashley DH Micro-tensile bond strength of resin cements to dentin and an indirect resin composite. Dent Mater 18:609-621. 2002.PubMed
5. Holderegger C, Sailer I, Schuhmacher C, Schla¨pfer R, Ha¨mmerle C, Fischer J. Shear bond strength of resin cements to human dentin. Dent Mater 24(7):944-950. 2008.Article PubMed
6. Linlin H, Akira O, Masayoshi F, Takashi OI. Evaluation of physical properties and surface degradation of self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 26(6):906-914. 2007.Article
7. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion acrylic filling material to enamel surface. J Dent Res 34:846-851. 1955.
8. Hagger O. British patent no. 687 299:1951.
9. Tanumiharja M, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Microtensile bond strengths of seven dentin adhesive systems. Dent Mater 16(3):180-187. 2000.Article PubMed
10. Pashley EL, Agee KA, Pashley DH, Tay FR. Effects of one versus two applications of an unfilled, all-in-one adhesive on dentine bonding. J Dent 30(2-3):83-90. 2002.Article PubMed
11. Bouillaguet S, Gysi P, Wataha JC, Ciucchi B, Cattani M, Godin C, Meyer JM. Bond strength of composite to dentin using conventional, one-step and self-etching adhesive systems. J Dent 29:55-61. 2001.Article PubMed
12. 김 도완, 박 상진, 최 경규. 자가부식형 상아질 접착제와 레진 시 멘트와의 적합성에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지 30:493-504. 2005.
13. 조 민우, 박 상혁, 김 종률, 최 경규. 레진시멘트의 접착 내구성에 관한 연구. 대한치과보존학회지 32:343-355. 2007.
14. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 20:963-971. 2004.Article PubMed
15. Oliver F. Creating a reliable bond. An all-in-one system. Am J Dent 13:85-87. 2006.
16. Tseng WY, Chen MH, Lu HH, Lin CW, Hsieh TT, Chen CH, Lai JY, Lee BS. Tensile bond strength of Er, Cr: YSGG laser-irradiated human dentin to composite inlays with two resin cements. Dent Mater 6(5):746-55. 2007.Article
17. Saskalauskaite E, Tam LE, McComb D. Flexural Strength, Elastic Modulus, and pH Profile of Self-etch Resin Luting Cements. J Prosthodont Dec 14 [E pub] 2007.
18. Senyilmaz DP, Palin WM, Shortall AC, Burke FJ. The effect of surface preparation and luting agent on bond strength to a zirconium-based ceramic. Oper Dent 32(6):623-630. 2007.Article PubMed PDF
19. Faltermeier A, Behr M, Mussig D. A comparative evaluation of bracket bonding with 1-, 2-, and 3-component adhesive systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 132(2):144.e1-5. 2007.Article PubMed
20. Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Schaible RB, Nikolaenko SA, Naumann M. Luting of ceramic inlays in vitro: marginal quality of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives versus self-etch cements. Dent Mater 24(2):185-191. 2008.Article PubMed
21. Goracci C, Cury AH, Cantoro A, Papacchini F, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Microtensile bond strength and interfacial properties of self-etching and self-adhesive resin cements used to lute composite onlays under different seating forces. J Adhes Dent 8(5):327-335. 2006.PubMed
22. Bishara SE, Ajlouni R, Laffoon JF, Warren JJ. Comparison of shear bond strength of two self-etch primer/adhesive systems. Angle Orthod 76(1):123-126. 2006.PubMed
23. Patierno JM, Rueggeberg FA, Anderson RW, Weller RN, Pashley DH. Push-out strength and SEM evaluation of resin composite bonded to internal cervical dentin. Endod Dent Traumatol 12:227-236. 1996.Article PubMed
24. House K, Sheriff M. An in-vitro investigation into the use of a single component self-etching primer adhesive system for orthodontic bonding: a pilot study. J Orthod 33:116-124. 2006.Article PubMed
25. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Oberschachtsiek H, Petschelt A. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaption after NaOCl pre-treatment. Oper Dent 25:40-45. 2000.PubMed
26. Swift EJ Jr, Wilder AD Jr, May KN Jr, Waddell SL. Shear bond strengths of one-bottle dentin adhesives using multiple applications. Oper Dent 22:194-199. 1997.PubMed
27. Fritz UB, Finger WJ. Bonding efficiency of single-bottle enamel/dentin adhesives. Am J Dent 12:277-282. 1999.PubMed
28. Miyazaki M, Ando S, Hinoura K, Onose H, Moore BK. Influence of filler addition to bonding agents on shear bond strength to bovine dentin. Dent Mater 11:234-238. 1995.Article PubMed
29. Gallo JR, Comeaux R, Haines B, Xu X, Burgess JO. Shear bond strength of four filled dentin bonding systems. Oper Dent 26:44-47. 2001.PubMed
30. Ai H, Nagai M. Effect of the adhesive layer thickness on the fracture toughness of dental adhesive resins. Dent Mater 19(2):153-163. 2000.Article
31. Zheng L, Pereira PN, Nakajima M, Sano H, Tagami J. Relationship between adhesive thickness and microten-sile bond strength. Oper Dent 26(1):97-104. 2001.PubMed
32. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentinal bonding. Quintessence Int 27(9):619-625. 1996.PubMed

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Shear bond strength of a self-adhesive resin cement to resin-coated dentin
Jee-Youn Hong, Cheol-Woo Park, Jeong-Uk Heo, Min-Ki Bang, Jae-Jun Ryu
The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics.2013; 51(1): 27. CrossRef
Effect of dentin surface wetness on tensile bond strength of self adhesive resin cements
Sung-Young Yoon, Se-Hee Park, Jin-Woo Kim, Kyung-Mo Cho
Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry.2009; 34(2): 113. CrossRef

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONAL ETCHING PROCEDURE ON PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH OF ONE-STEP RESIN CEMENT

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2008;33(5):443-451. Published online January 14, 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.5.443

XML Download

Figure

EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONAL ETCHING PROCEDURE ON PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH OF ONE-STEP RESIN CEMENT

Figure 1. Specimen design and dimension (mm) and prepared tooth specimen.

Figure 2. Push-out bond strength measuring device.

Figure 3. Representatives of SEM examination of failure surfaces of A; GMC, B; GME, C; GVL, D; RMC, E; RME, and F; RVL.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

EFFECT OF THE ADDITIONAL ETCHING PROCEDURE ON PUSH-OUT BOND STRENGTH OF ONE-STEP RESIN CEMENT

Brand of Resin cement	Adhesive system	Composition
Variolink II		Total Etch; 37% phosphoric acid
		Excite DSC; HEMA*, dimethacrylate, phosphonic
	Total-etching	acid acrylate, silicon dioxide
		Adhesive resin; Bis-GMA**, urethane
		dimethacrylate, filler

Maxcem		Base Paste; Uretanedimethacrylate,
	Self-etching	Camphoroquinone, Fluoroaluminosilicate, other
	&	Catalyst Paste; Bis-GMA**,
	Self-adhesive	Triethyleneglycoldimethacrylate,
		Glycerophosphatedimethacrylate, other

Group	Type of restoration	Brand of cement	Procedure
Group GMC	Gold inlay	Maxcem	m.i
Group GME	Gold inlay	Maxcem	additional etching
Group GVL	Gold inlay	Variolink Ⅱ	m.i
Group RMC	Synfony	Maxcem	m.i
Group RME	Synfony	Maxcem	additional etching
Group RVL	Synfony	Variolink Ⅱ	m.i

Group (n = 17)	Push-out bond strength (mean ± SD)	Statistic analysis (p < 0.05)
Group GMC	5.99 ± 2.12	AB
Group GME	4.41 ± 2.44	BC
Group GVL	7.14 ± 1.60	A
Group RMC	4.63 ± 1.82	B
Group RME	2.49 ± 1.61	C
Group RVL	7.13 ± 1.76	A

Table 1. Bonding systems used in this study

HEMA; Hydroxyethylmethacrylate

Bis-GMA; Bisphenol-A-glycidyldimethacrylate

Table 2. Group classification and adhesive methods for each groups

m.i.; according to the manufacturer's instruction

Table 3. Push-out bond strength (N/㎜2)

ABC; Significant difference between groups was indicated with different letters (p < 0.05).