Cargando…

Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine

SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (calcium silicate-based materials) have great importance in dentistry. There is no study comparing the bond strength of Biodentine and MTA for composite, compomer, and compomer or resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC). Although ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tulumbaci, Fatih, Almaz, Merve Erkmen, Arikan, Volkan, Mutluay, Merve Safa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5767820/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29386773
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_97_17
_version_ 1783292601331351552
author Tulumbaci, Fatih
Almaz, Merve Erkmen
Arikan, Volkan
Mutluay, Merve Safa
author_facet Tulumbaci, Fatih
Almaz, Merve Erkmen
Arikan, Volkan
Mutluay, Merve Safa
author_sort Tulumbaci, Fatih
collection PubMed
description SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (calcium silicate-based materials) have great importance in dentistry. There is no study comparing the bond strength of Biodentine and MTA for composite, compomer, and compomer or resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC). Although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; in this study, MTA has shown better shear bond strength (SBS) to restorative materials. AIM: Recently, a variety of calcium silicate-based materials are often used for pulp capping, perforation repair, and endodontic therapies. After those treatment procedures, teeth are commonly restored with composite resin, (RMGIC materials in pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SBS of composite resin (Filtek™ Z250; 3M ESPE, USA), compomer (Dyract XP; LD Caulk/Dentsply, USA), and resin-modified glass ionomer (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap; 3M ESPE, USA) to white MTA and Biodentine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety acrylic cylindrical blocks were prepared and divided into two groups (n = 45). The acrylic blocks were randomly allocated into 3 subgroups; Group-1A: MTA + composite (Filtek™ Z250), Group-1B: MTA + compomer (Dyract XP), Group-1C: MTA + RMGIC (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap), Group-2A: Biodentine + composite, Group-2B: Biodentine + compomer, Group-2C: Biodentine + RMGIC. The specimens were mounted in Universal Testing Machine. A crosshead speed 1 mm/min was applied to each specimen using a knife-edge blade until the bond between the MTA/Biodentine and restorative material failed. Failure modes of each group were evaluated under polarized light microscope at ×40 magnification. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between MTA + Composite resin with MTA + Compomer; and MTA + RMGIC with Biodentine + RMGIC (P > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between other groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study displayed that although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; MTA has shown better SBS to compomer and composite resin materials than Biodentine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5767820
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57678202018-01-31 Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine Tulumbaci, Fatih Almaz, Merve Erkmen Arikan, Volkan Mutluay, Merve Safa J Conserv Dent Original Article SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (calcium silicate-based materials) have great importance in dentistry. There is no study comparing the bond strength of Biodentine and MTA for composite, compomer, and compomer or resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC). Although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; in this study, MTA has shown better shear bond strength (SBS) to restorative materials. AIM: Recently, a variety of calcium silicate-based materials are often used for pulp capping, perforation repair, and endodontic therapies. After those treatment procedures, teeth are commonly restored with composite resin, (RMGIC materials in pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SBS of composite resin (Filtek™ Z250; 3M ESPE, USA), compomer (Dyract XP; LD Caulk/Dentsply, USA), and resin-modified glass ionomer (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap; 3M ESPE, USA) to white MTA and Biodentine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety acrylic cylindrical blocks were prepared and divided into two groups (n = 45). The acrylic blocks were randomly allocated into 3 subgroups; Group-1A: MTA + composite (Filtek™ Z250), Group-1B: MTA + compomer (Dyract XP), Group-1C: MTA + RMGIC (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap), Group-2A: Biodentine + composite, Group-2B: Biodentine + compomer, Group-2C: Biodentine + RMGIC. The specimens were mounted in Universal Testing Machine. A crosshead speed 1 mm/min was applied to each specimen using a knife-edge blade until the bond between the MTA/Biodentine and restorative material failed. Failure modes of each group were evaluated under polarized light microscope at ×40 magnification. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between MTA + Composite resin with MTA + Compomer; and MTA + RMGIC with Biodentine + RMGIC (P > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between other groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study displayed that although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; MTA has shown better SBS to compomer and composite resin materials than Biodentine. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5767820/ /pubmed/29386773 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_97_17 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Tulumbaci, Fatih
Almaz, Merve Erkmen
Arikan, Volkan
Mutluay, Merve Safa
Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title_full Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title_fullStr Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title_full_unstemmed Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title_short Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
title_sort shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and biodentine
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5767820/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29386773
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_97_17
work_keys_str_mv AT tulumbacifatih shearbondstrengthofdifferentrestorativematerialstomineraltrioxideaggregateandbiodentine
AT almazmerveerkmen shearbondstrengthofdifferentrestorativematerialstomineraltrioxideaggregateandbiodentine
AT arikanvolkan shearbondstrengthofdifferentrestorativematerialstomineraltrioxideaggregateandbiodentine
AT mutluaymervesafa shearbondstrengthofdifferentrestorativematerialstomineraltrioxideaggregateandbiodentine