Evaluation of influence of irrigation solution in strength adhesive of a resin cement
Avaliação da influência da solução de irrigação na resistência adesiva de um cimento resinoso
Camilotti, Veridiana; Ioris, Matheus Dalmédico; Busato, Priscilla do Monte Ribeiro; Ueda, Julio Katuhide; Mendonça, Márcio José
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1807-25772013000200003
Rev. odontol. UNESP, vol.42, n2, p.83-88, 2013
Abstract
The contamination of dentin can interfere with the quality of union between adhesives and tooth. Objective: Was to investigate the influence of different irrigation solutions on bond strength of a resin cement. Material and method: Were selected 40 dental bovine crowns divided into four groups: G0= physiologic serum, G1= chlorhexidine, G2= EDTA, G3= 0.12% chlorhexidine after acid etching. Then the cylinders were fabricated resin cement using a matrix of Tygon with an internal diameter of 1mm and 2mm in height. The polymerization was carried out by LED light unit with 900 mW/cm2 for 40 seconds. 4 cylinders were made of resin cement for each bovine crown, totaling 40 body-of-proof resin cement for each group evaluated. The test microshear bond strength was performed after 24 hours. After this period, the resin cement cylinders were tested in a universal testing machine (EMIC). Data were statistically analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey (p = 0.001). Result: There were no statistically significant differences between groups, except for the G3 which showed significantly lower values of bond strength. Conclusion: The different irrigating solutions used prior to etching dentin not interfere in the bond strength microshear.
Keywords
Detergents, shear strength, dental cements.
Resumo
A contaminação do substrato dentinário pode interferir na qualidade de união entre materiais adesivos e o dente. Objetivo: Investigar a influência de diferentes soluções de irrigação na resistência de união de um cimento resinoso. Material e método: Foram selecionadas 40 coroas dentais bovinas, divididas em quatro grupos: G0 = soro; G1 = clorexidina; G2 = EDTA; G3 = clorexidina 0,12%, após condicionamento ácido. Em seguida, foram confeccionados cilindros de cimento resinoso utilizando-se uma matriz de Tygon com diâmetro interno de 1 mm e 2 mm de altura. A fotoativação foi realizada por aparelho de luz LED com 900 mW/cm2 por 40 segundos. Foram confeccionados quatro cilindros de cimento resinoso para cada coroa bovina, totalizando 40 corpos de prova de cimento resinoso para cada grupo avaliado. O teste de resistência adesiva por microcisalhamento foi realizado após 24 horas. Decorrido esse período, os cilindros de cimento resinoso foram testados em uma máquina universal de ensaios (EMIC). Os dados obtidos foram submetidos à análise estatística pelos testes ANOVA e Tukey (p = 0,001). Resultado: Não houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre os grupos estudados, com exceção para o G3, que apresentou de forma significativa os menores valores de resistência adesiva. Conclusão: As diferentes soluções irrigadoras utilizadas previamente ao condicionamento ácido na dentina não interferem na resistência de união por microcisalhamento.
Palavras-chave
Detergentes, resistência ao cisalhamento, cimentos dentários.
References
1. Pendrys DG. Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RM-GIC) may provide greater caries preventive effect compared with composite resin, but high-quality studies are needed. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2011; 11:180-2. PMid:22078826. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2011.09.008
2. Pameijer CH. A review of luting agents. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:752861. doi: 10.1155/2012/752861. Epub 2012 Feb 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/752861
3. Hill EE, Lott J. A clinically focused discussion of luting materials. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56:67-76. PMid:21564117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01297.x
4. Mickenautsch, S. How well are GIC product labels related to current systematic review evidence? Dent Update. 2011; 38: 634-8. PMid:22238996.
5. Mount GJ. Clinical placement of modern glass-ionomer cements. Quintessence Int. 1993; 24: 99-107. PMid:8511271.
6. Goracci C, Ferrari M. Current perspectives on post systems: a literature review. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56: 77-83. PMid:21564118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01298.x
7. Lee JW, Cha HS, Lee JH. Curing efficiency of various resin-based materials polymerized through different ceramic thicknesses and curing time. J Adv Prosthodont. 2011; 3: 126-31. PMid:22053242 PMCid:3204447. http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2011.3.3.126
8. Franco EB, Dos Santos PA, Mondelli, RF. The effect of different light-curing units on tensile strength and microhardness of a composite resin. J Appl Oral Sci. 2007; 15: 470-4. PMid:19089182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572007000600003
9. Rode SN, Ferreira Santos JF. Limpeza cavitária: remoção da camada de "smear". Rev Bras Odontol. 1990; 47: 46-51.
10. Garcia R N, De Goes MF, Giannini M. Effect of water storage on bond strength of self-etching adhesives to dentin. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2007; 8: 46-53. PMid:17994154.
11. Stanislawczuk R, Reis A, Loguercio AD. A 2-year in vitro evaluation of a chlorhexidine-containing acid on the durability of resin-dentin interfaces. J Dent. 2009; 39: 40-7. PMid:20937350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.10.001
12. Lindblad RM, Lassila LV, Salo V, Vallittu PK, Tjäderhane L. Effect of chlorhexidine on initial adhesion of fiber-reinforced post to root canal. J Dent. 2010; 38:796-801. PMid:20600556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.06.011
13. Pisani-Proença J, Erhardt MC, Amaral R, Valandro LF, Bottino, MA, Del Castillo-Salmerón R. Influence of different surface conditioning protocols on microtensile bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:227-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60037-1
14. Pelegrine RA, De Martin AS, Cunha RS, Pelegrine AA, da Silveira Bueno CE. Influence of chemical irrigants on the tensile bond strength of an adhesive system used to cement glass fiber posts to root dentin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:e73-6. PMid:20813561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.05.005
15. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Nato F, Carrilho M, Visintini E, Tjäderhane L, et al. Chlorhexidine stabilizes the adhesive interface: a 2-year in vitro study. Dent Mater. 2010; 26: 320-5. PMid:20045177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.153
16. Fardal O, Turnbull RS. A review of the dental literature on the use of chlorhexidine in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 1986; 112: 863-9. PMid:2940282.
17. Perdigão J, Denehy GE, Swift JE. Effects of chlorhexidine on dentin surfaces and shear bond strengths. Am J Dent. 1994; 7: 81-4. PMid:8054190.
18. Gendron R, Grenier D, Sorsa T, Mayrand D. Inhibition of the activities of matrix metalloproteinases 2, 8 and 9 by chlorhexidine. Clin Diag Lab Immun. 1999; 6: 437-9. PMid:10225852 PMCid:103739.
19. Martin-De Las Heras S, Valenzuela A, Overall CM. The matrix metalloproteinase gelatinase A in human dentine. Arch Oral Biol. 2000; 45:757–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9969(00)00052-2
20. Santos J, Carrilho M, Tervahartiala T, Sorsa T, Breschi L, Mazzoni A, et al. Determination of matrix metalloproteinases in human radicular dentin. J Endod. 2009; 35: 686–9. PMid:19410083. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.02.003
21. Pashley EL, Tao L, Derkson G, Pashley DH. Dentin permeability and bond strengths after various surface treatments. Dent Mater. 1989; 5: 375-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(89)90103-6
22. Gjermo P. Chlorhexidine and related compounds. J Dent Res. 1989; 68: 1602-8.
23. Carvalho RM, Tay FR, Sano H, Yoshiyama M, Pashley DH. Long-term mechanical properties of EDTA-demineralized dentin matrix. J Adhes Dent. 2000; 2:193-9. PMid:11317392.
24. Sauro S, Toledano M, Aguilera FS, Mannocci F, Pashley DH, Tay FR, et al. Resin-dentin bonds to EDTA-treated vs. acid-etched dentin using ethanol wet-bonding. Dent Mater. 2010; 26:368-79. PMid:20074787. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.12.008
25. Gu XH, Mao CY, Liang C, Wang HM, Kern M. Does endodontic post space irrigation affect smear layer removal and bonding effectiveness? Eur J Oral Sci. 2009; 117: 597-603. PMid:19758258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2009.00661.x
26. Habelitz S, Balooch M, Marshall SJ, Balooch G, Marshall GWJR. In situ atomic force microscopy of partially demineralized human dentin collagen fibrils. J Struct Biol. 2002; 138: 227–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1047-8477(02)00029-1
27. Coli P, Alaeddin S, Wennerberg A, Karlsson S. In vitro dentin pre-treatment: surface roughness and adhesive shear bond strength. Eur J Oral Sci. 2003; 107: 400–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0909-8836.1999.eos107512.x
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email