Bond strengths between composite resin and auto cure glass ionomer cement using the co-cure technique

Similar documents
Ketac Universal Aplicap

of Resin Composite V Gopikrishna M Abarajithan J Krithikadatta D Kandaswamy

Get in front of the 8 ball with the new Fuji VIII GP. The first auto-cure, resin reinforced glass ionomer restorative

Ion uptake into demineralized dentine from glass ionomer cement following pretreatment with silver fluoride and potassium iodide

Shear Bond Strength of Chemical and Light Cured Glass Ionomer Cements Bonded to Resin Composite

In nitro bond strength of cements to treated teeth

stabilisation and surface protection

Enhancement of fluoride release from glass ionomer cement following a coating of silver fluoride

RESTORATIVE MATERIALS

Operative dentistry. Lec: 10. Zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE):

MDJ Evaluation the effect of eugenol containing temporary Vol.:9 No.:2 2012

Surface Treatments that Demonstrate a Significant Positive Effect on the Shear Bond Strength of Repaired Resin-modified Glass Ionomer

ORIGINAL RESEARCH. Sandhya CA Shyam Lohakare, Pushpa Vinay Hazarey ABSTRACT

SDR has proven reliability in high C-factor cavities 2

Fuji II LC. A Perfect Choice

Fuji BULK. Robust. Rapid. Remarkable.

Ketac Universal Aplicap

Adper Easy Bond. Self-Etch Adhesive. Technical Product Profile

EQUIA. Self-Adhesive, Bulk Fill, Rapid Restorative System

Correlation between the Strength of Glass Ionomer Cements and Their Bond Strength to Bovine Teeth

Fuji BULK. Rapid, Robust, Remarkable.

Original Research. The Effect of temperature on the strength of luting cements Patil SG et al

Adhesive Solutions. Scotchbond Universal Adhesive. SEM pictures of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive. One bottle for all cases! Total-Etch and Self-Etch

5,6 Significant improvements of the dentin bond

Shear bond strength ofchemical and light-cured glass ionomer cements bonded to resin composites

G-COAT PLUS G-COAT PLUS GET THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS WITH THE STROKE OF A BRUSH

Glass-ionomer cements: Current Status and Future Trends. John Nicholson University of Greenwich

EQUIA Forte Glass Hybrid Restorative System. For long term posterior restorations

Glass Ionomers. Reputable, Durable, Long Lasting

RelyX Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement Frequently Asked Questions

shrink less than 1 %

PUBLISHED VERSION. This document has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association, received 18th January, 2007.

Bonding to dentine: How it works. The future of restorative dentistry

PUBLISHED VERSION. This document has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association, received 18th January, 2007.

The Effect of Heat on the Surface Properties of Conventional Glass Ionomer Cements: SEM Evaluation

riva self cure 玻璃离 修复材料 GLASS IONOMER RESTORATIVE MATERIAL VIDRIO IONOMERO MATERIAL RESTAURADOR

Anisotropy of Tensile Strengths of Bovine Dentin Regarding Dentinal Tubule Orientation and Location

Comparison of shear bond strength of aesthetic restorative materials

how to technique How to treat a cracked, but still inact, cusp. Disadvantages. 1 Issue Full coverage crown. >>

Used Products. Variolink N LC. Proxyt fluoride-free. OptraStick. Ivoclean. Monobond N. OptraDam. N-Etch. Tetric N-Bond.

MARGINAL ADAPTATION AND PERFORMANCE OF BIOACTIVE DENTAL RESTORATIVE MATERIALS IN DECIDUOUS AND YOUNG PERMANENT TEETH

riva helping you help your patients

Immediate Dentin Sealing and Cerec How to avoid sensivities 100 pc and how to have lots of practical advantages

GLUMA Comfort + Desensitizer

shrink less than 1 %

Ketac Nano Light-Curing Glass Ionomer Restorative. An esthetic glass ionomer. Fewer steps. Faster treatment.

One cement that can take you just about anywhere! RelyX. Unicem. Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement

Root Surface Protection Simple. Effective. Important.

Is there any clinical evidence?

Effect of Self-etching Adhesives on the Bond Strength of Glass-Ionomer Cements

illustrated technique guide

Shear bond strength evaluation of resin composite to resin-modified glass-ionomer cement using three different resin adhesives vs.

G-Premio BOND. Introducing a premium bonding experience

< 1% shrinkage! * new record: Low Shrink Posterior Restorative. volumetric. The fi rst direct posterior composite to achieve less than 1 % shrinkage.

An in vitro study of the bond strength of light-cured glass ionomer cement in the bonding of orthodontic brackets

DH220 Dental Materials

UNIVERSAL ADHESIVE SYSTEM. PEAK UNIVERSAL BOND Light-Cured Adhesive with Chlorhexidine

JBR Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine and Dental Science

Pulpal Protection: bases, liners, sealers, caries control Module C: Clinical applications

Microleakage of class II packable resin composite lined with flowable composite and resin modified glass ionomer cement: An in vitro study

If you re still using a powder-liquid liner. Like VITREBOND...

Fuji VII Fuji VII EP. For all-round protection

Comparative shear bond strength of some orthodontic bonding resins to enamel

DUO-LINK UNIVERSAL KIT

Forgives Nothing. Forgives Almost Anything. Science Update

G-CEM LinkAce. The new strength in self-adhesive cement

Glass Ionomers. Ingredients. acid. Glass Ionomers

Early Shear Bond Strength of a One-step Self-adhesive on Orthodontic Brackets

Pulpal Protection: bases, liners, sealers, caries control Module D: Pulp capping-caries control

Pits and fissures: Relative space contribution in fissures from sealants, prophylaxis pastes and organic remnants

HIGH DEMANDS AND POWER PANAVIA TM F 2.0

RESINOMER Dual- Bisco. Instructions for Use. Cured Amalgam Bonding/Luting System

Peak. Universal Bond Light Cure Adhesive with Chlorhexidine. With its versatile formulation, Peak Universal Bond is the only adhesive you need.

Australian Dental Journal

BioCoat Featuring SmartCap Technology

The influence of accelerating the setting rate by ultrasound or heat on the bond strength of glass ionomers used as orthodontic bracket cements

Universal light-curing dental adhesive. All the power you need in one drop.

Evaluation the Effect of Different Surface Treatment on Shear Bond Strength between Composite Increments (An in vitro study)

***Handout*** Adhesive Dentistry Harald O. Heymann, DDS MEd Dentin Bonding Rewetting/Desensitization

Effect of surface treatment with commercial primers on tensile bond strength of auto-polymerizing resin to magnetic stainless steel

Shear Bond Strength of Acidic Primer, Light-Cure Glass Ionomer, Light-Cure and Self Cure Composite Adhesive Systems - An In Vitro Study

A comparison of shear bond strength and mean survival time between treated and untreated mesh backed stainless steel brackets, an in-vitro assessment.

G-Premio BOND. One component light cured universal adhesive. BOND with the BEST

Effect of various grit burs on marginal integrity of resin composite restorations

Effects of Temperature on the Fluoride Release and Recharging Ability of Glass Ionomers

Effect of Conditioning on Adhesion of Glass Ionomer Cements to Dentin

THE FUTURE DEMANDS THE RIGHT EQUIPMENT CLEARFIL SE BOND 2

Two approaches, one goal: Digital expertise versus manual skill in the fabrication of ceramic veneers

A Step-by-Step Approach to

Discover. the power of fibres. everx Posterior. from GC. sub-structure. Extending the limits. The strongest composite. of direct restorations.

Bond Strength of Composite Resin Luting Cements to Fiber-reinforced Composite Root Canal Post

the new dna of high strength glass ceramics

The effect of a plastic-wrapped LED light curing unit and curing distance variances on diametral tensile strength of composite resin

Due to recent developments in tooth-colored restorative

4 is the new 2: Bulk fill composites continue to evolve

Natural Tooth Pontic using Fiber-reinforced Composite for Immediate Tooth Replacement

6/1/15. Bonding Ceramic Veneers in What we did? What we do? Using Evidence-Based Dentistry XXXX ?????

DPI Luting Cement. DPI Restorative Cement

The Facts About Fillings

Bisco UNIVERSAL PRIMER

Transcription:

SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:(2):175-179 Bond strengths between composite resin and auto cure glass ionomer cement using the co-cure technique GM Knight,* JM McIntyre,* Mulyani* Abstract Background: The clinical technique for sandwich restorations prescribes etching initially set auto cure glass ionomer cement (GIC) prior to placing a layer of resin bond to develop a weak mechanical bond between composite resin and GIC. Co-curing a resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) bond and composite resin to GIC may create a chemical bond and improve the bond strengths between these two materials. Methods: A total of 48 specimens were prepared, 12 in each of four categories. Capsulated GIC was placed into a mould and allowed to set for four minutes, etched for five seconds followed by placement of a resin bond and photo cured for five seconds over which a composite resin was puddled onto the resin bond and photo cured for 10 seconds. Capsulated GIC was placed into a mould and allowed to set for four minutes after which a sample of RMGIC (Riva LC) was prepared using twice the liquid powder ratio and painted over the surface of the set GIC using a micro brush. An increment of composite resin was added over the RMGIC and both materials were photo co-cured for 10 seconds. Capsulated GIC was placed into a mould and RMGIC (Riva LC) that had been prepared using twice the liquid powder was brushed over the GIC (prior to initial set) followed by the placement of a layer of composite resin and photo co-cured for 10 seconds. Capsulated GIC was placed into a mould and RMGIC (Fuji II LC) that had been prepared using twice the liquid powder was brushed over the GIC (prior to initial set) followed by the placement of a layer of composite resin and photo co-cured for 10 seconds. Shear testing of each of the samples was carried out and specimens were examined to determine the nature of the fracture. Selected samples were prepared for SEM investigation to observe the interfaces between the GIC and Results: There were significantly lower bond strengths (P<0.05) amongst samples that had been etched and bonded (2.42MPa) compared to the other samples that had been co-cure bonded with RMGIC (6.48 7.05MPa). There were no significant *Dental School, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Adelaide, South Australia. differences amongst the bond strengths of the samples co-cure bonded with RMGIC. Specimens prepared by the etch and bond technique failed adhesively and co-cured specimens failed cohesively within the GIC. SEM investigation showed chemical bonds between RMGIC bond and GIC and Conclusions: The co-cured RMGIC bonding system eliminates several placement steps and produces a significantly stronger chemical bond between GIC and composite resin than the etch and bond technique. RMGIC bond and composite resin may be co-cured to GIC either before or after initial set has occurred. Key words: Bond strength, auto cure glass ionomer cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement, composite resin, cocure. Abbreviations and acronyms: GIC = glass ionomer cement; RMGIC = resin modified glass ionomer cement; SEM = scanning electron microscopy. (Accepted for publication 6 July 2005.) INTRODUCTION The sandwich restoration comprises of a base of auto cure glass ionomer cement (GIC) replacing lost dentine with an overlay of composite resin replacing lost enamel and is a technique widely used by Australian dentists. 1 McLean et al. 2 described bonding composite resin to GIC by etching the set GIC with phosphoric acid prior to applying resin bond. The clinical technique described by Mount 3 suggests etching the initially set GIC for 15 seconds prior to placing a layer of resin bond to develop a mechanical bond between the two materials. Bond strengths improve if the GIC is etched after 24 hours of maturation. 4,5 However, this procedure requires an additional clinical visit to complete a restoration. Resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) bonding agents have been shown to provide predictable long-term bonds between tooth structure and 6 Co-curing may be defined as the simultaneous photo polymerization of two different Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:2. 175

Table 1. Shear bond strength in megapascals of auto cure glass ionomer cement to composite resin Etch bond Set co-cure Riva Pre set co-cure Riva Pre set co-cure Fuji 1 2.02 3.52 6.23 14.94 2 0.51 9.76 7.48 4.56 3 1.50 5.00 9.46 4.07 4 3.61 6.27 5.10 6.20 5 3.91 3.87 13.60 4.70 6 1.45 7.89 3.68 5.71 7 0.39 4.06 3.01 7.27 8 1.85 12.03 3.45 4.67 9 6.16 7.85 8.83 6.05 10 1.90 6.76 13.56 6.08 11 3.28 6.63 5.20 8.62 12 2.52 9.86 5.06 5.29 Mean 2.42 6.96 7.05 6.48 SD 1.61 2.66 3.66 2.92 light activated restorative materials. The procedure was initially used to bond composite resin and RMGIC 7 and has been developed subsequently to incorporate a RMGIC as an intermediary bond between GIC and The sequential layering of GIC, RMGIC and composite resin prior to photo polymerization, and before the initial set of the GIC, enables an efficient single visit placement of a restoration although there is a lack of comparison of bond strengths between the GIC etch and bond technique and co-curing. The purpose of this study was to compare the bond strengths between GIC and composite resin using etch and bond, co-curing RMGIC and composite resin to GIC after initial set had occurred within the GIC and co-curing RMGIC and composite resin to GIC prior to initial set occurring within the GIC. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sample preparation Clear plastic drinking straws of 6 mm diameter were sectioned in lengths of 15 mm to create moulds into which the materials would be bonded. A total of 48 specimens were prepared, 12 in each of four categories: (1) Capsulated GIC (Riva, SDI, Melbourne, Australia) was mixed for 10 seconds using a RotoMix (3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA). It was then placed into the vertical mould and allowed to set for a timed four minutes. Following setting the inner surface was etched for five seconds with 37 per cent phosphoric acid (SDI) and washed with copious amounts of water and dried with oil free air. This was followed by placement of a resin bond (SDI) and photo cured for five seconds. A composite resin (Glacier, SDI) was puddled with a ball burnisher onto the resin bond and photo cured for 10 seconds; (2) Capsulated GIC (Riva, SDI) was mixed for 10 seconds using a RotoMix (3M ESPE). It was then placed into the vertical mould and allowed to set for a timed four minutes. A sample of RMGIC (Riva LC, SDI) was prepared using twice the liquid powder ratio as recommended by the manufacturer to form a creamy paste. The paste was brushed over the surface of the set GIC using a micro brush. An increment of composite resin (Glacier, SDI) was puddled with a ball burnisher onto the RMGIC and both materials were photo co-cured for 10 seconds; (3) Capsulated GIC (Riva, SDI) was mixed for 10 seconds using a RotoMix (3M ESPE). It was then placed into the vertical mould. A previously prepared sample of RMGIC (Riva LC, SDI) that had been prepared using twice the liquid powder ratio as recommended by the manufacturer to form a creamy paste was brushed over the pre-set GIC with a micro brush, followed by gently puddling a layer of composite resin (Glacier, SDI) over the RMGIC with a ball burnisher. The sample was photo co-cured for 10 seconds; (4) Capsulated GIC (Riva, SDI) was mixed for 10 seconds using a RotoMix (3M ESPE). It was then placed into the vertical mould. A previously prepared sample of RMGIC (Fuji II LC, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan) that had been prepared using twice the liquid powder ratio as recommended by the manufacturer to form a creamy paste was brushed over the pre-set GIC with a micro brush, followed by gently puddling a layer of composite resin (Glacier, SDI) over the RMGIC with a ball burnisher. The sample was photo co-cured for 10 seconds. After preparation each of the samples was stored in distilled water at room temperature for two weeks prior to fracture testing. Experimental method Samples were kept moist prior to testing to avoid any dehydration changes in the GIC that may have affected bond strengths. Shear testing of each of the samples was carried out using a Houndsfield Universal Testing Machine H50KM (Surrey, United Kingdom) with a Cross Head Speed of 1 mm per minute and a maximum loading of 200N. The specimens were placed, perpendicular to the direction of the load, on two metal rods 10mm apart. After testing, specimens were examined under a light microscope (Zeiss, Germany) at 20 times magnification to determine the nature of the fracture within the specimen. Selected samples were prepared for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Philips XL30 Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope, Netherlands) investigation to observe the interfaces between the GIC and 176 Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:2.

Fig 1. Mean shear bond strengths of auto cure glass ionomer cement to treated dentine samples. Data analysis Since the data were not normally distributed, statistical analysis using Analysis of Variance and post hoc testing to look at pairwise comparisons with no adjustment made for multiple comparisons was carried out. RESULTS The surface areas of the samples were each 113.14mm 2. Failure loads were recorded in Newtons and converted to megapascals and expressed as shear bond strengths. The recorded results are presented in Table 1 and shown graphically in Fig 1. There were significantly lower bond strengths (P<0.05) amongst samples that had been etched and bonded (2.42MPa) compared to the other samples that had been co-cure bonded with RMGIC (6.48 7.05MPa). There were no significant differences amongst the bond strengths of the samples co-cure bonded with RMGIC. Apart from a few small tags of GIC remaining at the interface all specimens prepared by the etch and bond technique failed adhesively. The remaining specimens that had been co-cured with RMGIC failed cohesively within the GIC. SEM examination of the samples that had been etched and bonded all demonstrated adhesive failure at the GIC composite resin interface (Fig 2). Higher magnification of a small GIC tag that remained intact Fig 3. High resolution SEM of small tag of adhesive auto cure glass ionomer cement. Arrows show margins of resin bond between materials. showed a close adaptation of the bond to the GIC and composite resin and there was a distinct interface between the two materials (Fig 3). SEM examination of the samples that had been cocured with RMGIC bond (Riva LC) and composite resin after the GIC had set showed cohesive fracture within the GIC. The presence of a gap along most of the GIC composite resin interface and other cracks in the GIC specimen was due to dehydration of the GIC during SEM preparation (Fig 4). Higher magnification of an intact bond interface showed an indistinct interface between the composite resin and GIC, suggesting that a chemical bond may have formed between the GIC and composite resin (Fig 5). SEM examination of the samples that had been cocured with RMGIC bond (Riva LC (Fig 6) and Fuji II LC (Fig 8)) and composite resin prior to initial set of the GIC showed that fracturing had occurred cohesively within the GIC. Higher magnification showed that although there were shrinkage cracks throughout the GIC, the restorative interface of the Fig 2. SEM of etched auto cure glass ionomer cement bonded to composite resin showing adhesive failure at interface. Fig 4. SEM of auto cure glass ionomer cement after initial set had occurred coated with Riva LC RMGIC and photo co-cured with cement. Interface fracture due to dehydration of glass ionomer cement during preparation for SEM. Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:2. 177

Fig 5. High resolution SEM showing interface of Riva LC RMGIC bond coated over set auto cure glass ionomer cement prior to applying and photo co-curing Arrows show interface of RMGIC bond where the merged margins between GIC and composite resin suggest a chemical bond. Fig 7. High resolution SEM showing interface of Riva LC RMGIC bond coated over auto cure glass ionomer cement prior to initial set and photo co-cured with Arrows indicate interface of chemical RMGIC bond to GIC and samples remained intact and the merging of materials at the restorative margins confirmed a chemical bond of the RMGIC bond to the composite resin and GIC (Figs 7 and 9). DISCUSSION Etching GICs immediately after initial set creates a weak mechanical bond and has been shown to have a deleterious effect on the material. 5 While waiting for 24 hours prior to etching slightly improves the bond strength, it is impractical as a clinical protocol. The cocuring technique eliminates several steps in placing a sandwich restoration and the improved chemical bond strength of RMGIC bond between GIC and composite is clearly a benefit for the restoration. Mixing the RMGIC at twice the manufacturer s recommended liquid powder ratio creates a creamy consistency, similar to a luting cement, that is easily brushed over set or unset GIC with a micro brush. Tyas et al. 6 have shown the predictable nature of composite resin bonded to tooth structure using a RMGIC bonding system. The placement of the RMGIC bond over the surface of the GIC and cavo surfaces within a tooth facilitates placement of a layer of composite resin that can be co-cured with RMGIC bond to both the tooth and the GIC. Allowing the GIC to reach initial set before co-curing RMGIC bond and composite resin produces chemical bond strengths beyond the cohesive strength of GIC. Co-curing RMGIC bond and composite resin onto GIC prior to initial set also produces chemical bond strengths beyond the cohesive strength of GIC. Apart from further reducing the time required to place a restoration, clinical experience has shown that the pneumatic pressure applied with a gloved thumb (prior to co-curing) creates a piston effect with the composite resin forcing the lower viscosity GIC into any voids remaining during placement of the GIC at the cavo margins. The exothermic polymerization of composite Fig 6. SEM of auto cure glass ionomer cement coated with Riva LC RMGIC bond prior to initial set and photo co-cured with cement. Fig 8. SEM of auto cure glass ionomer cement coated with Fuji II LC RMGIC bond prior to initial set and photo co-cured with cement. 178 Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:2.

situations where co-curing prior to initial set may improve the predictability of a restoration and further reduce the time required to place it. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Mr Victor Marino with data collection and statistical support from Ms Emmae Ramsay, Statistician, Department of Public Health at The University of Adelaide. Fig 9. High resolution SEM showing interface of Fuji II LC RMGIC bond coated over auto cure glass ionomer cement prior to initial set and photo co-cured with Arrows indicate interface of chemical RMGIC bond to GIC and resin heats up the surface of the pre-set GIC and may reduce the setting time of the GIC. CONCLUSIONS The clinical application of dental materials should aim to maximize their potential within the oral environment and the efficiency of their use. Replacing the etch and bond technique of mechanically bonding GICs to composite resin with a co-cured RMGIC bonding system eliminates several placement steps and produces a significantly stronger chemical bond between GIC and RMGIC bond and composite resin may be co-cured to GIC either before of after initial set has occurred. There are clinical REFERENCES 1. Forsten L, Mount GJ, Knight GM. Observations in Australia of the use of glass ionomer cement restorative material. Aust Dent J 1994;39:339-343. 2. Mclean JW, Powis DR, Prosser HJ, Wilson AD. The use of glass ionomer cements in bonding composite resin to dentine. Br Dent J 1985;158:410-414. 3. Mount GJ. Clinical placement of modern glass-ionomer cements. Quintessence Int 1993;24:99-107. 4. Kingsford Smith ED, Martin FE. Acid etching of glass ionomer cement base. Aust Dent J 1990;35:236-240. 5. Taggart SE, Pearson GJ. The effect of etching on glass polyalkenoate cements. J Oral Rehabil 1991;18:31-42. 6. Tyas MJ, Burrow MF. Clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive system: results at five years. Oper Dent 2002;27:438-441. 7. Knight GM. The co-cured, light-activated glass-ionomer cementcomposite resin restoration. Quintessence Int 1994;25:97-100. Address for correspondence/reprints: Dr GM Knight 20 Carpenter Street Brighton, Victoria 3186 Email: geoffbds@dentalk.com.au Australian Dental Journal 2006;51:2 179