Cargando…
Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture
CONTEXT: It is necessary to have a proper bond between pulp-capping agent and composite materials to maintain effective coronal seal. AIMS: This study aims to compare the shear bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) to calcium...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080171/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30122815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_146_18 |
_version_ | 1783345425215913984 |
---|---|
author | Elmi, Mehrshad Ehsani, Maryam Esmaeili, Behnaz Khafri, Soraya |
author_facet | Elmi, Mehrshad Ehsani, Maryam Esmaeili, Behnaz Khafri, Soraya |
author_sort | Elmi, Mehrshad |
collection | PubMed |
description | CONTEXT: It is necessary to have a proper bond between pulp-capping agent and composite materials to maintain effective coronal seal. AIMS: This study aims to compare the shear bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) to calcium-enriched mixture (CEM). METHODS: In this study, 30 acrylic blocks (with a central hole 4 mm diameter and 2 mm height) were prepared and filled with CEM. The blocks were divided into three groups: single bond2 (SB) with Filtek Z250, single bond universal (SBU) with Filtek Z250, and RMGI. The restorative materials were placed on the CEM, and shear bond strength was measured. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and games Howell tests. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULT: Bond strength of both composite groups to CEM showed significantly higher values than RMGI-CEM group (both P < 0.001). The type of the adhesive system( total etch or universal) had no significant effect on the bond strength of composite to CEM (P > 0.05). All the failures in composite groups were as cohesive in CEM and in RMGI group was as adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: Shear bond strength of composite resin to CEM cement was higher than RMGI irrespective of the type of the adhesive system. The universal bonding system is recommended for bonding of composite to CEM for ease of use. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6080171 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60801712018-08-17 Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture Elmi, Mehrshad Ehsani, Maryam Esmaeili, Behnaz Khafri, Soraya J Conserv Dent Original Article CONTEXT: It is necessary to have a proper bond between pulp-capping agent and composite materials to maintain effective coronal seal. AIMS: This study aims to compare the shear bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) to calcium-enriched mixture (CEM). METHODS: In this study, 30 acrylic blocks (with a central hole 4 mm diameter and 2 mm height) were prepared and filled with CEM. The blocks were divided into three groups: single bond2 (SB) with Filtek Z250, single bond universal (SBU) with Filtek Z250, and RMGI. The restorative materials were placed on the CEM, and shear bond strength was measured. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and games Howell tests. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULT: Bond strength of both composite groups to CEM showed significantly higher values than RMGI-CEM group (both P < 0.001). The type of the adhesive system( total etch or universal) had no significant effect on the bond strength of composite to CEM (P > 0.05). All the failures in composite groups were as cohesive in CEM and in RMGI group was as adhesive. CONCLUSIONS: Shear bond strength of composite resin to CEM cement was higher than RMGI irrespective of the type of the adhesive system. The universal bonding system is recommended for bonding of composite to CEM for ease of use. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6080171/ /pubmed/30122815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_146_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Elmi, Mehrshad Ehsani, Maryam Esmaeili, Behnaz Khafri, Soraya Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title | Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title_full | Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title_fullStr | Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title_short | Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
title_sort | comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080171/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30122815 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_146_18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT elmimehrshad comparisonofbondstrengthofacompositeresinwithtwodifferentadhesivesystemsandaresinmodifiedglassionomertocalciumenrichedmixture AT ehsanimaryam comparisonofbondstrengthofacompositeresinwithtwodifferentadhesivesystemsandaresinmodifiedglassionomertocalciumenrichedmixture AT esmaeilibehnaz comparisonofbondstrengthofacompositeresinwithtwodifferentadhesivesystemsandaresinmodifiedglassionomertocalciumenrichedmixture AT khafrisoraya comparisonofbondstrengthofacompositeresinwithtwodifferentadhesivesystemsandaresinmodifiedglassionomertocalciumenrichedmixture |