Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength to dentin with three different aesthetic chemically bonded restorative materials – an In-vitro study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/sadj.v79i01.18158Keywords:
Zirconomer, Amalgomer CR, glass ionomer cement, shear bond strengthAbstract
The use of glass ionomer cements (GIC) as a restorative material was limited to areas of low masticatory forces due to their low mechanical properties which were also affected by the powder/liquid mixing ratio of this material. Bond strength is important for the clinical success of adhesive material. The shear bond strength (SBS) is the maximum force that an adhesive joint can tolerate before fracture which is tested by SBS tests. The high bond strength helps the adhesive to resist stresses caused by resin contraction
and forces for a longer time and thus prevents the problems of bond failure such as recurrent caries, tooth sensitivity and restoration failure. GIC as a restorative material has the capacity to release fluoride and shows good bonding ability. The use of GIC in anterior applications appears to be satisfactory, but they have limitations for use in permanent posterior teeth, particularly with regard to large restorations. Zirconia-reinforced GI (Zirconomer, Shofu Inc, Japan) is a new class of restorative material containing reinforced
glass ionomer with special zirconia fillers that promises the strength and durability of amalgam with the protective benefits of glass ionomer while eliminating the hazards of mercury. Amalgomer CR (Advanced Health Care, Tonbridge, Kent, UK), a novel ceramic-reinforced GIC, was introduced, which combines the benefits of GIC with the high strength of ceramics. In the present study, shear bond strength to the dentin with Zirconomer, Amalgomer CR and Fuji type IX GIC (GC Tokyo) are compared.
Downloads
References
Yu OY, Lam WY-H, Wong AW-Y, Duangthip D, Chu C-H. Nonrestorative Management of Dental Caries. Dent. J.2021, 9, 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj9100121 dental caries - ref -1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/dj9100121
Bassir MM, Labibzadeh A, Mollaverdi F. The effect of amount of lost tooth structure and restorative technique on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars. J Conserv Dent. 2013 Sep;16(5):413-7. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.117494 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.117494
Sujith R, Yadav TG, Pitalia D, Babaji P, Apoorva K, Sharma A. Comparative Evaluation Of Mechanical And Microleakage Properties Of Cention-N, Composite, and Glass Ionomer Cement Restorative Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020;21:691-5. 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2837 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2837
Kim M, Jo D-W, Khalifah SA, Yu B, Hayashi M, Kim RH. Shear Bond Strength of Composite Diluted with Composite-Handling Agents on Dentin and Enamel. Polymers 2022, 14, 2665. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14132665 ref -4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14132665
Tsujimoto A, Barkmeier WW, Fischer NG, Nojiri K, Nagura Y, Takamizawa T, Latta MA, Miazaki M. Wear Of Resin Composites: Current Insights Into Underlying Mechanisms, Evaluation Methods And Influential Factors. Jpn Dent Sci Rev. 2018;54:76-87. 10.1016/j.jdsr.2017.11.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdsr.2017.11.002
Mazumdar P, Das A, Mandal D. Comparative Evaluation Of Bond Strength Of Composite Resin & Cention N to Enamel And Dentin With And Without Etching Under Universal Testing Machine. University J Dent Scie. 2018;4:1-6. https://old.amu.ac.in/pdf/dentjour/ COMPARATIVE%20EVALUATION%20OF%20BOND.pdf
Sikri VK. Color: Implications in dentistry. J Conserv Dent. 2010 Oct;13(4):249-55. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.73381 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.73381
Almuhaiza M. Glass-ionomer Cements in Restorative Dentistry: A Critical Appraisal. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016 Apr 1;17(4):331-6. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1850 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1850
Bowen RL, Marjenhoff WA. Dental composites/glass ionomers: the materials. Adv Dent Res. 1992 Sep;6:44-9. 10.1177/08959374920060011601 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08959374920060011601
Hervás-García A, Martínez-Lozano MA, Cabanes-Vila J, Barjau-Escribano A, Fos Galve P. Composite resins. A review of the materials and clinical indications. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2006 Mar 1;11(2):E215-20. https://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/medicorpa/v11n2/en_23.pdf
Ramasetty PA, Bhat KY, Prasanna MK. (2014). Comparative evaluation of remineralization, fluoride release and physical properties of conventional GIC following incorporation of 1% and 2% zinc acetate: An in vitro study. International Journal of Oral Health Sciences. 2014:4(1). 10.4103/2231-6027.151613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/2231-6027.151613
Eligeti T, Dola B, Kamishetty S, Gaddala N, Swetha A, Bandari J. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Cention N with Other Aesthetic Restorative Materials to Dentin: An in Vitro Study. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology. 2021;25(6):12707-14. https://annalsofrscb.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/7993
Kumari A, Singh N. A comparative evaluation of microleakage and dentin shear bond strength of three restorative materials. Biomater Investig Dent. 2022 Feb 10;9(1):1-9. doi: 10.1080/26415275.2022.2033623 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2022.2033623
Chalissery VP, Marwah N, Almuhaiza M, AlZailai AM, Chalisserry EP, Bhandi SH, Anil S. Study of the Mechanical Properties of the Novel Zirconia-reinforced Glass lonomer Cement. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016;17(5):394-8. 10.5005/jpjournals-10024-1861 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1861
Neveen M Ayad, Salwa A Elnogoly, Osama M Badie. An In-Vitro Study Of The Physico-Mechanical Properties Of A New Esthetic Restorative Versus Dental Amalgam. Rev. Clín. Pesq. Odontol. Curitiba. 2008; 4(3):137-44. 234076666_An_InVitro_Study_of_the_PhysicoMechanical_Properties_of_ _New_Esthetic_Restorative_Versus_Dental_Amalgam
Prasada K, Vidhyadhara HT. Comparative Evaluation Of Sorption And Solubility Of Amalgomer Cr And Cention N Restorative Material – An In Vitro Study. International Journal Of Dentistry Research. 2020;5:122-5. 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1407 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31254/dentistry.2020.5303
Kishor Sapkale K, Rucha Sane R, Bashir Ahmed SA. Comparative Evaluation of Dentin Bond Strength of Zirconomer, Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement, and Resin - Modified Glass Ionomer Cement - An in Vitro Study. International Journal of Science and Research. 2020;9(1):954-9. https://www.ijsr.net/archive/v9i1/ART20204186.pdf
Nanavati K, Katge F, Krishna Chimata V, Pradhan D, Kamble A, Patil D. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Bioactive Restorative Material, Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement and Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement to the Dentinal Surface of Primary Molars: an in vitro Study. J Dent Shiraz Univ Med Sci. December 2021; 22(4): 260-6
Naz F, et al. Comparative evaluation of mechanical and physical properties of a new bulk-fill alkasite with conventional restorative materials. Saudi Dental Journal (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.04.01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.04.012
Riad MI, Badr SB, Ibrahim MA. Bond Performance of ceramic-modified Glass ionomer restorative. E.D.J. 2011;57:1-9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335631837_Bond_Performance_of_ceramic-modified_Glass_ionomer_restorative
Iftikhar N, Devashish, Srivastava B, Gupta N, Ghambir N, Rashi-Singh. A Comparative Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Four Different Restorative Materials: An In Vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2019;12(1):47-49. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1592 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1592
Patel MU, Punia SK, Bhat S, Singh G, Bhargava R, Goyal P, Oza S, Raiyani CM. An in vitro Evaluation of Microleakage of Posterior Teeth Restored with Amalgam, Composite and Zirconomer - A Stereomicroscopic Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9: 65-7.10.7860/JCDR/2015/13024.6225 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/13024.6225
Somani R, Jaidka S, Singh DJ, Sibal GK. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Various Glass Ionomer Cements to Dentin of Primary Teeth: An in vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016 Jul-Sep;9(3):192-6. 10.5005/jpjournals-10005-1362 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1362
Balagopal S, Nekkanti S, Kaur K. An In Vitro Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties and Fluoride-releasing Ability of a New Self-cure Filling Material. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021 Feb 1;22(2):134-139 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3050
Sharma C, Kaur H, Aggarwal M, Jakhu S. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Glass Ionomer Cement, Composite and Compomer in Primary Teeth: An In Vitro Study. 2023. ISSN:2753-9172 https://doi.org/10.58624/SVOADE.2023.04.0127 DOI: https://doi.org/10.58624/SVOADE.2023.04.0127
Bhattacharya P, Naidu J, Tambakad PB. Comparative Evaluation Of Shear Bond Strength And Flexural Strength Of New Zirconia Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement With Commonly Used Glass Ionomer Cements Used In Atraumatic Restorative
Treatment: An In Vitro Study. J Oper Dent Endod. 2018;3:83-91. 10.5005/jp journals-10047-0062
Gu YW, Yap AUJ, Cheang P, Koh YL, Khor KA. Development of zirconia-glass ionomer cement composites. Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids.2005;351(6-7):508-14. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2005.01.045 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2005.01.045
Kawai Y, Uo M, Wang Y, Kono S, Ohnuki S, Watari F. Phase transformation of zirconia ceramics by hydrothermal degradation. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(3):286-92. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2010-175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2010-175
Bhattacharya A, Vaidya S, Tomer AK, Raina AA. GIC at its best – A review on ceramic reinforced GIC. International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences. 2017; 3(4): 405-408. https://www.oraljournal.com/pdf/2017/vol3issue4/PartF/3-4-59-261.pdf
Murthy SS, Murthy GS. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Three Commercially Available Glass Ionomer Cements in Primary Teeth. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7(8):103-7. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Comparative-Evaluation of-Shear-Bond-Strength-of-in-Murthy-Murthy/79e5ae056bc95a4b1240159a537c2085a13460ec
Swift EJ Jr. Effects of glass ionomers on recurrent caries. Oper Dent. 1989 Winter;14(1):40-3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2697861/
Berg JH. Glass ionomer cements. Pediatr Dent. 2002 Sep-Oct;24(5):430-8. https://
www.aapd.org/globalassets/media/publications/archives/berg5-02.pdf
Abdallah R, Abdelghany AM, Aref, N. “Does Modification of Amalgomer with Propolis Alter Its Physicomechanical Properties? An In Vitro Study”, International Journal of Biomaterials, 2020, Article ID 3180879, 10 pages, 2020. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijbm/2020/3180879/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3180879
Gautam E, Somani R, Jaidka S, Hussain S. A comparative evaluation of compressive strength and antimicrobial efficacy of Fuji IX and Amalgomer CR: An in vitro study. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020;10(2):118-21. 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.03.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.03.001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
.png){kind=spacer}