Cargando…

Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study

AIM: This study aims to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different resin cements - total etch and rinse, self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements, used to bond the lithium disilicate restorations to human dentin. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Comparative -Invitro study design. MAT...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Upadhyaya, Viram, Arora, Aman, Singhal, Jagriti, Kapur, Smriti, Sehgal, Monika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685336/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31462863
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_161_19
_version_ 1783442384530440192
author Upadhyaya, Viram
Arora, Aman
Singhal, Jagriti
Kapur, Smriti
Sehgal, Monika
author_facet Upadhyaya, Viram
Arora, Aman
Singhal, Jagriti
Kapur, Smriti
Sehgal, Monika
author_sort Upadhyaya, Viram
collection PubMed
description AIM: This study aims to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different resin cements - total etch and rinse, self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements, used to bond the lithium disilicate restorations to human dentin. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Comparative -Invitro study design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five lithium disilicate (IPS E.max) discs (4 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick) were fabricated and randomly divided into three groups (n = 15). The occlusal surfaces of 45 extracted human maxillary premolars were ground flat. Fifteen specimens were luted, under a constant load, with each of the following resin cement: Variolink N (Group VN), Multilink N (Group MN), and Multilink Speed (Group MS). All cemented specimens were stored in distilled water for 1-week following which, they were tested under shear loading at a constant crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until fracture on a universal testing machine; the load at fracture was reported in megapascals (MPa) as the bond strength. Fractured specimens were also inspected by the scanning electron microscopy. Statistical analysis of the collected data was performed using one-way ANOVA test, post hoc Bonferroni test, and Chi-square test (α =0.05). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Oneway ANOVA test and post hoc Bonferroni test. RESULTS: Mean SBS data of the groups in MPa were: Variolink N (Group VN): 14.19 ± 0.76; Multilink N (Group MN): 10.702 ± 0.75; and Multilink Speed (Group MS): 5.462 ± 0.66. Significant differences in SBS (P < 0.001) of the three resin cement were found. Intergroup comparison revealed statistically significant differences in SBS between Groups VN and MN (P < 0.001), Groups B and C (P < 0.001), and Groups VN and MS (P < 0.001). Chi-square test used to compare the distribution of mode of bond failure among the three groups delineated that the cohesive failure was significantly more among Group VN, whereas adhesive failure was significantly more among Group MN and MS. CONCLUSION: Total etch and rinse resin cement, i.e., Variolink N (Group VN) produced significantly higher bond strength of all-ceramics to dentin surfaces than did the self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements, i.e., Multilink N and Multilink Speed, respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6685336
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66853362020-07-01 Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study Upadhyaya, Viram Arora, Aman Singhal, Jagriti Kapur, Smriti Sehgal, Monika J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIM: This study aims to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different resin cements - total etch and rinse, self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements, used to bond the lithium disilicate restorations to human dentin. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Comparative -Invitro study design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five lithium disilicate (IPS E.max) discs (4 mm in diameter and 3 mm thick) were fabricated and randomly divided into three groups (n = 15). The occlusal surfaces of 45 extracted human maxillary premolars were ground flat. Fifteen specimens were luted, under a constant load, with each of the following resin cement: Variolink N (Group VN), Multilink N (Group MN), and Multilink Speed (Group MS). All cemented specimens were stored in distilled water for 1-week following which, they were tested under shear loading at a constant crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until fracture on a universal testing machine; the load at fracture was reported in megapascals (MPa) as the bond strength. Fractured specimens were also inspected by the scanning electron microscopy. Statistical analysis of the collected data was performed using one-way ANOVA test, post hoc Bonferroni test, and Chi-square test (α =0.05). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Oneway ANOVA test and post hoc Bonferroni test. RESULTS: Mean SBS data of the groups in MPa were: Variolink N (Group VN): 14.19 ± 0.76; Multilink N (Group MN): 10.702 ± 0.75; and Multilink Speed (Group MS): 5.462 ± 0.66. Significant differences in SBS (P < 0.001) of the three resin cement were found. Intergroup comparison revealed statistically significant differences in SBS between Groups VN and MN (P < 0.001), Groups B and C (P < 0.001), and Groups VN and MS (P < 0.001). Chi-square test used to compare the distribution of mode of bond failure among the three groups delineated that the cohesive failure was significantly more among Group VN, whereas adhesive failure was significantly more among Group MN and MS. CONCLUSION: Total etch and rinse resin cement, i.e., Variolink N (Group VN) produced significantly higher bond strength of all-ceramics to dentin surfaces than did the self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements, i.e., Multilink N and Multilink Speed, respectively. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6685336/ /pubmed/31462863 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_161_19 Text en Copyright: © 2019 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 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
Upadhyaya, Viram
Arora, Aman
Singhal, Jagriti
Kapur, Smriti
Sehgal, Monika
Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title_full Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title_short Comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: An in vitro study
title_sort comparative analysis of shear bond strength of lithium disilicate samples cemented using different resin cement systems: an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6685336/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31462863
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_161_19
work_keys_str_mv AT upadhyayaviram comparativeanalysisofshearbondstrengthoflithiumdisilicatesamplescementedusingdifferentresincementsystemsaninvitrostudy
AT aroraaman comparativeanalysisofshearbondstrengthoflithiumdisilicatesamplescementedusingdifferentresincementsystemsaninvitrostudy
AT singhaljagriti comparativeanalysisofshearbondstrengthoflithiumdisilicatesamplescementedusingdifferentresincementsystemsaninvitrostudy
AT kapursmriti comparativeanalysisofshearbondstrengthoflithiumdisilicatesamplescementedusingdifferentresincementsystemsaninvitrostudy
AT sehgalmonika comparativeanalysisofshearbondstrengthoflithiumdisilicatesamplescementedusingdifferentresincementsystemsaninvitrostudy