“Comparison of In-Vitro Bond Strengths Between Orthodontic Light Cure Composite Resin and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement after Fluoride Application using Custom made Bond Strength Measuring Device”

2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Shrikant S. Chitko ◽  
Pranav Y. Chandarana ◽  
Nitin D. Gulve
1989 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. Cook ◽  
C. C. Youngson

The shear/peel bond strength of a new material, a ‘hybrid’ of a composite resin and a glass ionomer cement, was compared in vitro with the bond strengths of a composite resin and of a glass ionomer cement. The new material had a significantly greater bond strength than the other materials tested and its properties were very similar to the composite resin. Unlike the glass ionomer cement, etching of the enamel before applying the adhesive is required. The clinical indications for using this new cement are discussed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila Sabatini ◽  
Manthan Patel ◽  
Eric D'Silva

SUMMARY Objective To evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of three self-adhesive resin cements and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) to different prosthodontic substrates. Materials and Methods The substrates base metal, noble metal, zirconia, ceramic, and resin composite were used for bonding with different cements (n=12). Specimens were placed in a bonding jig, which was filled with one of four cements (RelyX Unicem, Multilink Automix, Maxcem Elite, and FujiCEM Automix). Both light-polymerizing (LP) and self-polymerizing (SP) setting reactions were tested. Shear bond strength was measured at 15 minutes and 24 hours in a testing device at a test speed of 1 mm/min and expressed in MPa. A Student t-test and a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to evaluate differences between setting reactions, between testing times, and among cements irrespective of other factors. Generalized linear regression model and Tukey tests were used for multifactorial analysis. Results Significantly higher mean SBS were demonstrated for LP mode relative to SP mode (p<0.001) and for 24 hours relative to 15 minutes (p<0.001). Multifactorial analysis revealed that all factors (cement, substrate, and setting reaction) and all their interactions had a significant effect on the bond strength (p<0.001). Resin showed significantly higher SBS than other substrates when bonded to RelyX Unicem and Multilink Automix in LP mode (p<0.05). Overall, FujiCEM demonstrated significantly lower SBS than the three self-adhesive resin cements (p<0.05). Conclusions Overall, higher bond strengths were demonstrated for LP relative to SP mode, 24 hours relative to 15 minutes and self-adhesive resin cements compared to the RMGICs. Bond strengths also varied depending on the substrate, indicating that selection of luting cement should be partially dictated by the substrate and the setting reaction.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Praveen Kumar Reddy ◽  
Kolasani Srinivasa Rao ◽  
Garlapati Yugandhar ◽  
B Sunil Kumar ◽  
SN Chandrasekhar Reddy ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT The acid pretreatment and use of composite resins as the bonding medium has disadvantages like scratching and loss of surface enamel, decalcification, etc. To overcome disadvantages of composite resins, glass ionomers and its modifications are being used for bonding. The study was conducted to evaluate the efficiency of resin reinforced glass ionomer as a direct bonding system with conventional glass ionomer cement and composite resin. The study showed that shear bond strength of composite resin has the higher value than both resin reinforced glass ionomer and conventional glass ionomer cement in both 1 and 24 hours duration and it increased from 1 to 24 hours in all groups. The shear bond strength of resin reinforced glass ionomer cement was higher than the conventional glass ionomer cement in both 1 and 24 hours duration. Conditioning with polyacrylic acid improved the bond strength of resin reinforced glass ionomer cement significantly but not statistically significant in the case of conventional glass ionomer cement. How to cite this article Rao KS, Reddy TPK, Yugandhar G, Kumar BS, Reddy SNC, Babu DA. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Resin Reinforced Chemical Cure Glass Ionomer, Conventional Chemical Cure Glass Ionomer and Chemical Cure Composite Resin in Direct Bonding Systems: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(1):21-25.


1988 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 247-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A Cook ◽  
C. C. Youngson

The shear/peel bond strength of a ‘no-mix’ composite orthodontic bonding resin was compared in vitro with that of a glass ionomer cement. The effect of pre-treatment of the enamel, with either phosphoric acid or polyacrylic acid, prior to using the glass ionomer cement was also assessed. The composite resin had a significantly higher bond strength than the glass ionomer cement. Simple prophylaxis and drying of the enamel achieved the best results when using the glass ionomer cement, whilst etching the tooth surface with phosphoric acid produced a significantly poorer bond to the enamel. Investigation of the site of failure showed the composite resin bonded very well to the tooth and less well to the bracket, whilst the glass ionomer adhered significantly better to the bracket base than to the tooth surface.


2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-15
Author(s):  
Ashish R Jain ◽  
R Pradeep ◽  
Sashi Deepth Reddy Janapala ◽  
P Sesha Reddy

ABSTRACT Background Dentinal sealers (desensitizing agents) are used to protect the pulp from possible injurious effects after tooth preparation and also prevent the penetration of dentinal tubules by bacteria and their products which are currently thought to cause most of the pulpal inflammation under the crowns. Aim The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy of effect of three different desensitizing agents on retention of crowns cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Materials and methods Forty freshly extracted maxillary first premolars were notched for retention and the teeth specimens were mounted in autopolymerising resin. The axial height of all the specimens was 4 mm with a 20° angle of convergence. Impressions of the prepared teeth were made, later waxed invested and casted. Thirty teeth were coated with three different desensitizing agents were used in this study: Cavity varnish (Namuvar, Deepti Dental Products), Glutaraldehyde (Gluma- Heraeus Kulzer), Resin (AdheSE, Ivoclar Vivadent). Ten teeth were not coated with desensitizing agents to act as control group. Independent T test used to compare the mean values between groups. Results Tensile strength for average surface area of the groups I, II, III and IV are 0.3759, 0.2375, 0.2411, 0.2348 respectively. The t-test shows ‘p’-value is statistically not significant (p < 0.05) for groups II and III, where as in group IV ‘p’-value is statistically significant (p < 0.01). Conclusion The use of AdheSE/resin-based dentinal sealer showed increase in bond strength of the crowns luted with resin-modified glass ionomer cement when compared with control group. This study advocates the use of resin-based sealer or a glutaraldehyde-based sealer before cementation of the crowns. The cavity varnish, however, reduces the bond strength and is not acceptable. How to cite this article Janapala SDR, Reddy PS, Jain AR, Pradeep R. The Effect of Three Dentinal Sealers on Retention of Crowns cemented with Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement: An in vitro Study. World J Dent 2015;6(1):10-15.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document