scholarly journals Determination of Strength Adhesion Indicators of Glass-Ionomer Cement for Permanent Fixation of Hard Tissues

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 277-280
Author(s):  
I. V. Yanishen ◽  
◽  
O. V. Sidorova
2019 ◽  
pp. 59-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
I.V. Yanishen ◽  
O.V. Sidorova

Fixation of indirect constructions restoration with permanent cement is the final clinical stage of orthopedic treatment. It should be noted that the result of the treatment with the using of unremovable dentures essentially depends on the correct choice of cement for fixation. The comparative analysis conducted to improve the quality of fixing method of unremovable dentures was carried out on the base of the Research laboratory of dental materials and products of JSC «STOMA», Ukraine. We used the following materials: glassionomer cements “KetakCem”, Germany; “Riva”, Australia.  The study of physico-mechanical properties of materials was carried out according to the following parameters: determination of the strength of the diametrical stretching (T, MPa), bending strength (σ, MPa), determination of the water absorption index (W, μg / mm³), free linear shrinkage (L,%), solubility index (D,%), and compressive strength (C, MPa). At the determination of the strength the diametrical stretching index (T, MPa) according to the results of laboratory tests "Ketac Cem", "Riva" and the new glass ionomer cement developed by us for permanent fixing of unremovable dentures.We have received that the indices of all selected cements are within 8.8 - 9.9 MPa which are close to international standards ISO 4104. Also we found out that the boundary value at the diametral stretched "Riva", which is (8.9 ± 0.3) MPa, is not greater than Ketac Cem (9.9 ± 0.6) and is reliably non-existent significant differences (p> 0.05). The glass ionomer cement developed by us with an index of 8.8 ± 0.5% (T, MPa) with a certainty (p> 0.05) has no difference between the indicators of «Ketac Cem» and «Riva» materials. Consequently, the strength limit at the diametrical extension of a new glass ionomer cement for permanent fixation has no significant difference compared with its foreign analogues (p> 0,05). The strength of the curtain (σ, MPa) of the materials under investigation for fixing unremovable dentures varies within (55.9 ± 70.2). It was found out that the durability of a new glass ionomer dental cement is (58.3 ± 0.4%). It is significantly lower (p <0,001) than the ‘Ketac Cem’ material - 70,2 ± 0,7%, while the "Riva" (55,9 ± 0,8%) has the least value. We indicate that the strength of the material @Riva "is significantly lower (p <0.001). In determining the rate water absorption, we obtained the following results: the glass ionomer cement developed by us has the limits of water absorption which is 42.7 ± 0.4 μg / mm3 compared with the analogues Ketac Cem and Riva - 36.3 ± 0.6 and 39 , 7 ± 0.3 μg / mm 3, respectively. The data of statistical processing showed that the water absorption of glass ionomeric cements is significantly lower (p <0,001). Free linear shrinkage of new glass ionomer cement has limits of 0,44 ± 0,03%, which exceeds the value of "Ketac Cem" (0,33 ± 0,02) by 0,11±0,01%, and is significant (p <0, 05) is less in comparison with "Riva", the index of which is 0,66±0,09%. The solubility index of the cement we developed is 1.30 ± 0.16%, which is 0.07 ± 0.03% higher than Ketac Cem - 1.23 ± 0.17%, but not significantly different from the material "Riva ", which index is 1.32±0.14%, which corresponds to ISO, but these data do not have statistically significant differences (p> 0.05). The results of the compression strength index are characterized not by a significant difference between them: the cement developed is 76.2 ± 0.4% MPa, which is significantly (p <0.001) 2.4 ± 0.1% less than Ketac Cem - 78.6 ± 0,5%, but does not have a significant difference (p> 0,05) between the developed material and the «Riva» index which is 76,0 ± 0,8%, respectively.


2019 ◽  
pp. 61-67
Author(s):  
Xuan Anh Ngoc Ho ◽  
Anh Chi Phan ◽  
Toai Nguyen

Background: Class II restoration with zirconia inlay is concerned by numerous studies about the luting coupling between zirconia inlay and teeth. The present study was performed to evaluate the microleakage of Class II zirconia inlayusing two different luting agents and compare to direct restoration using bulk fill composite. Aims: To evaluate the microleakage of Class II restorations using three different techniques. Materials and methods: The study was performed in laboratory with three groups. Each of thirty extracted human teeth was prepared a class II cavity with the same dimensions, then these teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups restored by 3 different approaches. Group 1: zirconia inlay cemented with self-etch resin cement (Multilink N); Group 2: zirconia inlay cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Plus); Group 3: direct composite restoration using bulk fill composite(Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill). All restorations were subjected to thermal cycling (100 cycles 50C – 55 0C), then immersed to 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. The microleakage determined by the extent of dye penetration along the gingival wall was assessed using two methods: quantitative and semi-quantitative method. Results: Among three types of restorations, group 1 demonstrated the significantly lower rate of leakage compared to the others, while group 2 and 3 showed no significant difference. Conclusion: Zirconia inlay restoration cemented with self-etch resin cement has least microleakage degree when compare to class II zirconia inlay restoration cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement and direct composite restoration using bulk fill composite. Key words: inlay, zirconia ceramic, class II restoration, microleakage.


Author(s):  
Nagalakshmi Chowdhary ◽  
N. K. Kiran ◽  
A. Lakshmi Priya ◽  
Rajashekar Reddy ◽  
Arvind Sridhara ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Débora Michelle Gonçalves de Amorim ◽  
Aretha Heitor Veríssimo ◽  
Anne Kaline Claudino Ribeiro ◽  
Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção e Souza ◽  
Isauremi Vieira de Assunção ◽  
...  

AbstractTo investigate the impact of radiotherapy on surface properties of restorative dental materials. A conventional resin composite—CRC (Aura Enamel), a bulk-fill resin composite—BFRC (Aura Bulk-fill), a conventional glass ionomer cement—CGIC (Riva self cure), and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement—RMGIC (Riva light cure) were tested. Forty disc-shaped samples from each material (8 mm diameter × 2 mm thickness) (n = 10) were produced according to manufacturer directions and then stored in water distilled for 24 h. Surface wettability (water contact angle), Vickers microhardness, and micromorphology through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after exposition to ionizing radiation (60 Gy) were obtained. The data were statistically evaluated using the two-way ANOVA and Tukey posthoc test (p < 0.05). Baseline and post-radiation values of contact angles were statistically similar for CRC, BFRC, and RMGIC, whilst post-radiation values of contact angles were statistically lower than baseline ones for CGIC. Exposition to ionizing radiation statistically increased the microhardness of CRC, and statistically decreased the microhardness of CGIC. The surface micromorphology of all materials was changed post-radiation. Exposure to ionizing radiation negatively affected the conventional glass ionomer tested, while did not alter or improved surface properties testing of the resin composites and the resin-modified glass ionomer cement tested.


Author(s):  
Abeer Alaohali ◽  
Delia S. Brauer ◽  
Eileen Gentleman ◽  
Paul T. Sharpe

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
pp. 49-54
Author(s):  
Salil Mehra ◽  
Ashu K. Gupta ◽  
Bhanu Pratap Singh ◽  
Mandeep Kaur ◽  
Ashwath Kumar

Abstract Introduction The aim of the current study was to evaluate shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to Theracal LC, Biodentine, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) using universal adhesive and mode of fracture. Materials and Methods A total of 50 caries-free maxillary and mandibular molars extracted were taken; occlusal cavities were prepared, mounted in acrylic blocks, and divided into five groups based on the liner used. Group 1: Biodentine liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 12 minutes. Group 2: Biodentine liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 14 days. Group 3: RMGIC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied immediately. Group 4: RMGIC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 7 days. Group 5: Theracal LC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied immediately. Each sample was bonded to resin composite using universal adhesive. Shear bond strength analysis was performed at a cross-head speed of 0.1 mm/min. Statistical Analysis  Statistical analysis was performed with one-way analysis of variance and posthoc Bonferroni test using SPSS version 22.0. Results and Conclusion Biodentine liner when bonded immediately to resin composite showed minimum shear bond strength. RMGIC when bonded to resin composite after 7 days showed maximum shear bond strength. Mode of fracture was predominantly cohesive in groups having Biodentine and Theracal LC as liner.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document