scholarly journals Antimicrobial activity of different dental cements on aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Thalyta Brito Santos Lima ◽  
Isabela Nunes Souza ◽  
Raquel Santos De Oliveira ◽  
João Milton Rocha Gusmão ◽  
Isabel Celeste Caires Pereira Gusmão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antimicrobial Activity ◽  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Saline Solution ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Base Layer ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Sterile Saline ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate, in vitro, the possible antimicrobial activity against the A actinomycetemcomytans of three dental cements: glass-ionomer cement, zinc phosphate cement and resin cement. Material and Methods: Strains of A actinomycetemcomitans ATCC 29522 were used. The microorganism was grown in BHI Agar and transferred to tubes containing sterile saline solution. The suspension was calibrated to a similar turbidity to the 0.5 tube from McFarland scale. A base layer consisting of 20 ml of BHI agar was placed in sterile Petri 90 x 15 mm plates. After solidification, was added 0,1 uL of microbial suspension, and three wells with 6 mm in diameter and 1mm deep were made, the wells were filled with cements with zinc phosphate cement, glass-ionomer cement and resin cement indicated for permanent cementation for fixed prostheses immediately after handling and positive (chlorhexidine) and negative (saline) controls. Results: After 48 hours the presence or absence of inhibition halo of microbial growth was analyzed around the specimens. Conclusion: Zinc phosphate cement and glass ionomer cement tested showed antibacterial activity against A actinomycetemcomitans unlike resin cement.

Comparison of the Solubility of Conventional Luting Cements with that of the Polyacid Modified Composite Luting Cement and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (12) ◽  
pp. 1016-1021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew Thomas ◽  
Mohammed Mustafa ◽  
Reshma Karkera ◽  
AP Nirmal Raj ◽  
Lijo Isaac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Time Intervals ◽  
Luting Cements ◽  
Luting Cement ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Ionomer Cement

ABSTRACT Introduction This study was planned to find the solubility of the conventional luting cements in comparison with that of the polyacid-modified composite luting cement and recently introduced resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) with exposure to water at early stages of mixing. Materials and methods An in vitro study of the solubility of the following five commercially available luting cements, viz., glass ionomer cement (GIC) (Fuji I, GC), zinc phosphate (Elite 100, GC), polyacid-modified resin cement (PMCR) (Principle, Dentsply), polycarboxylate cement (PC) (Poly - F, Dentsply), RMGIC (Vitremer, 3M), was conducted. For each of these groups of cements, three resin holders were prepared containing two circular cavities of 5 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. All the cements to be studied were mixed in 30 seconds and then placed in the prepared cavities in the resin cement holder for 30 seconds. Results From all of the observed luting cements, PMCR cement had shown the lowest mean loss of substance at all immersion times and RMGIC showed the highest mean loss of substance at all immersion times in water from 2 to 8 minutes. The solubility of cements decreased by 38% for GIC, 33% for ZnPO4, 50% for PMCR, 29% for PC, and 17% for RMGIC. Conclusion The PMCR cement (Principle-Dentsply) had shown lowest solubility to water at the given time intervals of immersion. This was followed by PC, zinc phosphate, and GIC to various time intervals of immersion. How to cite this article Karkera R, Nirmal Raj AP, Isaac L, Mustafa M, Reddy RN, Thomas M. Comparison of the Solubility of Conventional Luting Cements with that of the Polyacid Modified Composite Luting Cement and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(12):1016-1021.

scholarly journals In Vitro Tensile Strength of Luting Cements on Metallic Substrate

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 136-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iara A. Orsi ◽  
Fernando K. Varoli ◽  
Carlos H.P. Pieroni ◽  
Marly C.C.G. Ferreira ◽  
Eduardo Borie
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Metallic Substrate ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Luting Cements ◽  
Ionomer Cement

The aim of this study was to determine the tensile strength of crowns cemented on metallic substrate with four different types of luting agents. Twenty human maxillary molars with similar diameters were selected and prepared to receive metallic core castings (Cu-Al). After cementation and preparation the cores were measured and the area of crown's portion was calculated. The teeth were divided into four groups based on the luting agent used to cement the crowns: zinc phosphate cement; glass ionomer cement; resin cement Rely X; and resin cement Panavia F. The teeth with the crowns cemented were subjected to thermocycling and later to the tensile strength test using universal testing machine with a load cell of 200 kgf and a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The load required to dislodge the crowns was recorded and converted to MPa/mm2. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis analysis with a significance level of 1%. Panavia F showed significantly higher retention in core casts (3.067 MPa/mm2), when compared with the other cements. Rely X showed a mean retention value of 1.877 MPa/mm2 and the zinc phosphate cement with 1.155 MPa/mm2. Glass ionomer cement (0.884 MPa/mm2) exhibited the lowest tensile strength value. Crowns cemented with Panavia F on cast metallic posts and cores presented higher tensile strength. The glass ionomer cement showed the lowest tensile strength among all the cements studied.

scholarly journals Effect of cement types on the tensile strength of metallic crowns submitted to thermocycling

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simonides Consani ◽  
Julie Guzela dos Santos ◽  
Lourenço Correr Sobrinho ◽  
Mário Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti ◽  
Manoel Damião Sousa-Neto
Keyword(s):  
Tensile Strength ◽  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Tensile Load ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Ionomer Cement

The relationship between metallic cast crowns and tensile strength according to cement types submitted to thermocycling was studied. Seventy-two metallic crowns were cast with Verabond II Ni-Cr alloy and cemented in standardized preparations with 10º tapering. Three types of finishing line (45-degree chamfered, 20-degree bevel shoulder and right shoulder) were made with diamond burs on bovine teeth. Twenty-four metallic crowns in each group were randomly subdivided into three subgroups of 8 samples each according to the cement used: SS White zinc phosphate cement, Vitremer resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and Rely X resin cement and were submitted to thermocycling. Retention was evaluated according to tensile load required to displace the metallic cast crowns from tooth preparations with an Instron testing machine. ANOVA and Tukey's test showed a statistically significant difference among luting materials, with greater results for Rely X resin cement (24.9 kgf) followed by SS White zinc phosphate cement (13.3 kgf) and Vitremer resin-modified glass ionomer cement (10.1 kgf). The finishing line types did not influence the tensile resistance of the crowns fixed with the three cements. Increased tensile resistance of metallic crowns fixed on bovine teeth was obtained with resin cement, independent of the finishing line types.

scholarly journals The influence of two different cements on remaining cement excess in cement-retained implant-supported zirconia crowns. An in vitro study

BDJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jazmin Hidalgo ◽  
Desirée Baghernejad ◽  
Anders Falk ◽  
Christel Larsson
Keyword(s):  
Dental Implant ◽  
Calcium Aluminate ◽  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Zirconia Crowns ◽  
Aluminate Glass ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Abstract Aim To compare the amount of remaining cement excess after cementation of implant-supported zirconia crowns with zinc phosphate or calcium aluminate glass ionomer cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty zirconia crowns were cemented on dental implant abutments using a calcium aluminate glass ionomer cement (n = 10) and zinc phosphate cement (n = 10). After removal of cement excess, remaining cement excess were measured with pixel area calculation method and by weighing. Differences in amount of remaining cement excess were analyzed using Independent Samples t-Test. Level of significance was set at p = 0.05. Results Zinc phosphate cement had a significantly greater amount of remaining cement excess than calcium aluminate glass ionomer cement in terms of total number of pixels (p = 0.002) and amount in grams (p = 0.005). Conclusion The study suggests that the amount of remaining cement excess can be affected by the type of cement. Calcium aluminate glass ionomer cement may be a more suitable choice for cement-retained dental implant restorations, and possibly reduce the risk of complications related to cement excess such as peri-implant disease. Further studies are needed to verify the results from the present study.

Microleakage of class II restoration with zirconia inlay: An in vitro study

2019 ◽  
pp. 61-67
Author(s):  
Xuan Anh Ngoc Ho ◽  
Anh Chi Phan ◽  
Toai Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Ionomer Cement ◽  
Group 1 ◽  
Composite Restoration

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document