Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Silva,Renata Andreza Talaveira da
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Coutinho,Margareth, Cardozo,Pedro Igor, Silva,Larissa Alves da, Zorzatto,José Roberto
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572011000400011
Resumo: During post preparation, the root canal is exposed to the oral cavity, and endodontic treatment may fail because of coronal leakage, bacterial infection and sealing inability of the luting cement. OBJECTIVE: this study quantified the interfacial continuity produced with conventional dual-cure and self-adhesive resin cements in the cervical (C), medium (M) and apical (A) thirds of the root. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty single-rooted human teeth were restored using Reforpost # 01 conical glass-fiber posts and different materials (N=10 per group): group AC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + AllCem; group ARC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + RelyX ARC; group U100=RelyX U100; and group MXC=Maxcem Elite. After being kept in 100% humidity at 37°C for 72 hours, the samples were sectioned parallel to their longitudinal axis and positive epoxy resin replicas were made. The scanning electron micrographs of each third section of the teeth were combined using Image Analyst software and measured with AutoCAD-2002. We obtained percentage values of the interfacial continuity. RESULTS: Interfacial continuity was similar in the apical, medium and cervical thirds of the roots within the groups (Friedman test, p&gt;0.05). Comparison of the different cements in a same root third showed that interfacial continuity was lower in MXC (C=45.5%; M=48.5%; A=47.3%) than in AC (C=85.9%, M=81.8% and A=76.0%), ARC (C=83.8%, M=82.4% and A=75.0%) and U100 (C=84.1%, M=82.4% and A=77.3%) (Kruskal-Wallis test, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Allcem, Rely X ARC and U100 provide the best cementation; cementation was similar among root portions; in practical terms, U100 is the best resin because it combines good cementation and easy application and none of the cements provides complete interfacial continuity.
id USP-17_5aab0f436516176c1e7df36d838b2b73
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1678-77572011000400011
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrityPost and core techniqueResin cementsDental marginal adaptationDentinbonding agentsDuring post preparation, the root canal is exposed to the oral cavity, and endodontic treatment may fail because of coronal leakage, bacterial infection and sealing inability of the luting cement. OBJECTIVE: this study quantified the interfacial continuity produced with conventional dual-cure and self-adhesive resin cements in the cervical (C), medium (M) and apical (A) thirds of the root. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty single-rooted human teeth were restored using Reforpost # 01 conical glass-fiber posts and different materials (N=10 per group): group AC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + AllCem; group ARC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + RelyX ARC; group U100=RelyX U100; and group MXC=Maxcem Elite. After being kept in 100% humidity at 37°C for 72 hours, the samples were sectioned parallel to their longitudinal axis and positive epoxy resin replicas were made. The scanning electron micrographs of each third section of the teeth were combined using Image Analyst software and measured with AutoCAD-2002. We obtained percentage values of the interfacial continuity. RESULTS: Interfacial continuity was similar in the apical, medium and cervical thirds of the roots within the groups (Friedman test, p&gt;0.05). Comparison of the different cements in a same root third showed that interfacial continuity was lower in MXC (C=45.5%; M=48.5%; A=47.3%) than in AC (C=85.9%, M=81.8% and A=76.0%), ARC (C=83.8%, M=82.4% and A=75.0%) and U100 (C=84.1%, M=82.4% and A=77.3%) (Kruskal-Wallis test, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Allcem, Rely X ARC and U100 provide the best cementation; cementation was similar among root portions; in practical terms, U100 is the best resin because it combines good cementation and easy application and none of the cements provides complete interfacial continuity.Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP2011-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572011000400011Journal of Applied Oral Science v.19 n.4 2011reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP10.1590/S1678-77572011005000010info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSilva,Renata Andreza Talaveira daCoutinho,MargarethCardozo,Pedro IgorSilva,Larissa Alves daZorzatto,José Robertoeng2014-06-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1678-77572011000400011Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2014-06-11T00:00Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
title Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
spellingShingle Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
Silva,Renata Andreza Talaveira da
Post and core technique
Resin cements
Dental marginal adaptation
Dentinbonding agents
title_short Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
title_full Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
title_fullStr Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
title_full_unstemmed Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
title_sort Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity
author Silva,Renata Andreza Talaveira da
author_facet Silva,Renata Andreza Talaveira da
Coutinho,Margareth
Cardozo,Pedro Igor
Silva,Larissa Alves da
Zorzatto,José Roberto
author_role author
author2 Coutinho,Margareth
Cardozo,Pedro Igor
Silva,Larissa Alves da
Zorzatto,José Roberto
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Silva,Renata Andreza Talaveira da
Coutinho,Margareth
Cardozo,Pedro Igor
Silva,Larissa Alves da
Zorzatto,José Roberto
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Post and core technique
Resin cements
Dental marginal adaptation
Dentinbonding agents
topic Post and core technique
Resin cements
Dental marginal adaptation
Dentinbonding agents
description During post preparation, the root canal is exposed to the oral cavity, and endodontic treatment may fail because of coronal leakage, bacterial infection and sealing inability of the luting cement. OBJECTIVE: this study quantified the interfacial continuity produced with conventional dual-cure and self-adhesive resin cements in the cervical (C), medium (M) and apical (A) thirds of the root. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty single-rooted human teeth were restored using Reforpost # 01 conical glass-fiber posts and different materials (N=10 per group): group AC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + AllCem; group ARC=Adper™ ScotchBond™ Multi-purpose Plus + RelyX ARC; group U100=RelyX U100; and group MXC=Maxcem Elite. After being kept in 100% humidity at 37°C for 72 hours, the samples were sectioned parallel to their longitudinal axis and positive epoxy resin replicas were made. The scanning electron micrographs of each third section of the teeth were combined using Image Analyst software and measured with AutoCAD-2002. We obtained percentage values of the interfacial continuity. RESULTS: Interfacial continuity was similar in the apical, medium and cervical thirds of the roots within the groups (Friedman test, p&gt;0.05). Comparison of the different cements in a same root third showed that interfacial continuity was lower in MXC (C=45.5%; M=48.5%; A=47.3%) than in AC (C=85.9%, M=81.8% and A=76.0%), ARC (C=83.8%, M=82.4% and A=75.0%) and U100 (C=84.1%, M=82.4% and A=77.3%) (Kruskal-Wallis test, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Allcem, Rely X ARC and U100 provide the best cementation; cementation was similar among root portions; in practical terms, U100 is the best resin because it combines good cementation and easy application and none of the cements provides complete interfacial continuity.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572011000400011
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572011000400011
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1678-77572011005000010
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science v.19 n.4 2011
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1748936437053521920