Publication

Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning

van den Breemer, C. R., Özcan, M., Pols, M. R., Postema, A. R., Cune, M. S. & Gresnigt, M. M., 2019, In : The international journal of esthetic dentistry. 14, 1, p. 52-63 12 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

APA

van den Breemer, C. R., Özcan, M., Pols, M. R., Postema, A. R., Cune, M. S., & Gresnigt, M. M. (2019). Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning. The international journal of esthetic dentistry, 14(1), 52-63.

Author

van den Breemer, Carline Rg ; Özcan, Mutlu ; Pols, Margot Re ; Postema, Anique R ; Cune, Marco S ; Gresnigt, Marco Mm. / Adhesion of resin cement to dentin : effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning. In: The international journal of esthetic dentistry. 2019 ; Vol. 14, No. 1. pp. 52-63.

Harvard

van den Breemer, CR, Özcan, M, Pols, MR, Postema, AR, Cune, MS & Gresnigt, MM 2019, 'Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning' The international journal of esthetic dentistry, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 52-63.

Standard

Adhesion of resin cement to dentin : effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning. / van den Breemer, Carline Rg; Özcan, Mutlu; Pols, Margot Re; Postema, Anique R; Cune, Marco S; Gresnigt, Marco Mm.

In: The international journal of esthetic dentistry, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2019, p. 52-63.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Vancouver

van den Breemer CR, Özcan M, Pols MR, Postema AR, Cune MS, Gresnigt MM. Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning. The international journal of esthetic dentistry. 2019;14(1):52-63.


BibTeX

@article{7a67023dacb34a7ab0725841246a36c9,
title = "Adhesion of resin cement to dentin: effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning",
abstract = "PURPOSE: This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to dentin after applying two adhesive (A) systems with a combination of four different immediate dentin sealing (IDS) strategies, and two surface conditioning (SC) methods.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Human third molars (n = 140) were collected and randomly split (n = 70 each) between the two A systems (Clearfil SE Bond; Kuraray [AC] and Optibond FL; Kerr [AO]). The A groups were further divided into four IDS strategies (2 x one adhesive layer (IDS-1L); 2 x two adhesive layers (IDS-2L); 2 x one adhesive layer and one flowable layer (IDS-F); 2 x no adhesive layer (delayed dentin sealing [DDS]). Finally, each strategy group was categorized into one of the two SC methods (only pumice [SC-P] or pumice and silica coating [SC-PS]), except the DDS group, where only SC-P was used. This resulted in 14 groups of 10 specimens each. The occlusal coronal third was removed from each molar crown with a diamond saw (Isomet 1000), and IDS was applied, followed by temporary restorations. These were removed after 2 weeks of water storage, and the IDS surfaces were subsequently conditioned. The standard adhesive procedure (Syntac Primer and Adhesive, Heliobond; Ivoclar Vivadent) was executed, followed by the application of a resin cement (Variolink II; Ivoclar Vivadent) and photopolymerization. All specimens were subjected to thermocyclic aging (10,000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C). Shear force was applied to the adhesive interface in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Fracture types and locations after loading were classified. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent samples t tests.RESULTS: AO groups exhibited higher mean SBS values (14.4 ± 6.43) than AC groups (12.85 ± 4.97) (P = 0.03). ANOVA showed the main effect of the applications on the SBS in the different groups (P = 0.00). Both DDS groups showed significantly lower SBS values compared with all the IDS groups (IDS-1L, IDS-2L, IDS-F). No significant differences in SBS results were found between the IDS groups (P = 0.43) and between the SC methods (P = 0.76). Dentin-cement interface failures diminished with the application of IDS.CONCLUSION: IDS improves the SBS compared with DDS. No significant differences were found between the tested conditioning methods.",
author = "{van den Breemer}, {Carline Rg} and Mutlu {\"O}zcan and Pols, {Margot Re} and Postema, {Anique R} and Cune, {Marco S} and Gresnigt, {Marco Mm}",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "52--63",
journal = "The international journal of esthetic dentistry",
issn = "2198-591X",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adhesion of resin cement to dentin

T2 - effects of adhesive promoters, immediate dentin sealing strategies, and surface conditioning

AU - van den Breemer, Carline Rg

AU - Özcan, Mutlu

AU - Pols, Margot Re

AU - Postema, Anique R

AU - Cune, Marco S

AU - Gresnigt, Marco Mm

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - PURPOSE: This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to dentin after applying two adhesive (A) systems with a combination of four different immediate dentin sealing (IDS) strategies, and two surface conditioning (SC) methods.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Human third molars (n = 140) were collected and randomly split (n = 70 each) between the two A systems (Clearfil SE Bond; Kuraray [AC] and Optibond FL; Kerr [AO]). The A groups were further divided into four IDS strategies (2 x one adhesive layer (IDS-1L); 2 x two adhesive layers (IDS-2L); 2 x one adhesive layer and one flowable layer (IDS-F); 2 x no adhesive layer (delayed dentin sealing [DDS]). Finally, each strategy group was categorized into one of the two SC methods (only pumice [SC-P] or pumice and silica coating [SC-PS]), except the DDS group, where only SC-P was used. This resulted in 14 groups of 10 specimens each. The occlusal coronal third was removed from each molar crown with a diamond saw (Isomet 1000), and IDS was applied, followed by temporary restorations. These were removed after 2 weeks of water storage, and the IDS surfaces were subsequently conditioned. The standard adhesive procedure (Syntac Primer and Adhesive, Heliobond; Ivoclar Vivadent) was executed, followed by the application of a resin cement (Variolink II; Ivoclar Vivadent) and photopolymerization. All specimens were subjected to thermocyclic aging (10,000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C). Shear force was applied to the adhesive interface in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Fracture types and locations after loading were classified. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent samples t tests.RESULTS: AO groups exhibited higher mean SBS values (14.4 ± 6.43) than AC groups (12.85 ± 4.97) (P = 0.03). ANOVA showed the main effect of the applications on the SBS in the different groups (P = 0.00). Both DDS groups showed significantly lower SBS values compared with all the IDS groups (IDS-1L, IDS-2L, IDS-F). No significant differences in SBS results were found between the IDS groups (P = 0.43) and between the SC methods (P = 0.76). Dentin-cement interface failures diminished with the application of IDS.CONCLUSION: IDS improves the SBS compared with DDS. No significant differences were found between the tested conditioning methods.

AB - PURPOSE: This study evaluated the shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to dentin after applying two adhesive (A) systems with a combination of four different immediate dentin sealing (IDS) strategies, and two surface conditioning (SC) methods.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Human third molars (n = 140) were collected and randomly split (n = 70 each) between the two A systems (Clearfil SE Bond; Kuraray [AC] and Optibond FL; Kerr [AO]). The A groups were further divided into four IDS strategies (2 x one adhesive layer (IDS-1L); 2 x two adhesive layers (IDS-2L); 2 x one adhesive layer and one flowable layer (IDS-F); 2 x no adhesive layer (delayed dentin sealing [DDS]). Finally, each strategy group was categorized into one of the two SC methods (only pumice [SC-P] or pumice and silica coating [SC-PS]), except the DDS group, where only SC-P was used. This resulted in 14 groups of 10 specimens each. The occlusal coronal third was removed from each molar crown with a diamond saw (Isomet 1000), and IDS was applied, followed by temporary restorations. These were removed after 2 weeks of water storage, and the IDS surfaces were subsequently conditioned. The standard adhesive procedure (Syntac Primer and Adhesive, Heliobond; Ivoclar Vivadent) was executed, followed by the application of a resin cement (Variolink II; Ivoclar Vivadent) and photopolymerization. All specimens were subjected to thermocyclic aging (10,000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C). Shear force was applied to the adhesive interface in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Fracture types and locations after loading were classified. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent samples t tests.RESULTS: AO groups exhibited higher mean SBS values (14.4 ± 6.43) than AC groups (12.85 ± 4.97) (P = 0.03). ANOVA showed the main effect of the applications on the SBS in the different groups (P = 0.00). Both DDS groups showed significantly lower SBS values compared with all the IDS groups (IDS-1L, IDS-2L, IDS-F). No significant differences in SBS results were found between the IDS groups (P = 0.43) and between the SC methods (P = 0.76). Dentin-cement interface failures diminished with the application of IDS.CONCLUSION: IDS improves the SBS compared with DDS. No significant differences were found between the tested conditioning methods.

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 52

EP - 63

JO - The international journal of esthetic dentistry

JF - The international journal of esthetic dentistry

SN - 2198-591X

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 75702293