939 resultados para adhesive cementation
Resumo:
Purpose: Existing composite restorations on teeth are often remade prior to the cementation of fixed dental prostheses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of static and cyclic loading on ceramic laminate veneers adhered to aged resin composite restorations.Materials and Methods: Eighty sound maxillary incisors were collected and randomly divided into four groups: group 1: control group, no restorations; group 2: two Class III restorations; group 3: two Class IV restorations; group 4: complete composite substrate. Standard composite restorations were made using a microhybrid resin composite (Anterior Shine). Restored teeth were subjected to thermocycling (6000 cycles). Window preparations were made on the labial surface of the teeth for ceramic laminate fabrication (Empress II). Teeth were conditioned using an etch-and-rinse system. Existing composite restorations representing the aged composites were silica coated (CoJet) and silanized (ESPE-Sil). Ceramic laminates were cemented using a bis-GMA-based cement (Variolink Veneer). The specimens were randomly divided into two groups and were subjected to either static (groups 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a) or cyclic loading (groups 1b, 2b, 3b, 4b). Failure type and location after loading were classified. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test.Results: Significantly higher fracture strength was obtained in group 4 (330 +/- 81 N) compared to the controls in group 1 (179 +/- 120 N) (one-way ANOVA, p < 0.05). Group lb survived a lower mean number of cyclic loads (672,820 cycles) than teeth of groups 2b to 4b (846x10(3) to 873x10(3) cycles). Failure type evaluation after the fracture test showed predominantly adhesive failures between dentin and cement, but after cyclic loading, more cohesive fractures in the ceramic were seen.Conclusion: Ceramic laminate veneers bonded to conditioned aged composite restorations provided favorable results. Surface conditioning of existing restorations may eliminate the necessity of removing aged composite restorations.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of different cleaning media on the adhesion of resin cement to feldspathic ceramic after etching.Materials and Methods: The cementation surfaces of ceramic blocks (N = 20, n = 5 per group) were etched with 10% hydrofluoric acid (HF) gel for 20 s and rinsed for 60 s. They were then randomly assigned to 4 groups: G1: air-water spray+drying (control); G2: ultrasonic cleaning in distilled water for 4 min+drying; G3: ultrasonic cleaning in 99.5% acetone for 4 min+drying; G4: ultrasonic cleaning in 70% alcohol for 4 min+drying. The ceramic blocks were silanized and cemented (RelyX ARC) to the composite blocks. Subsequently, the microtensile bond strength test (mu TBS) was performed. In addition, EDS analysis was made to assess the elemental composition of the conditioned and cleaned ceramic surfaces.Results: A significantly higher mean mu TBS was obtained when specimens had been ultrasonically cleaned in distilled water (G2: 18.8 +/- 0.4 MPa) (p < 0.05) compared to other groups (G1: 16.6 +/- 0.5; G3: 16.1 +/- 0.9; G4: 15.8 +/- 1.4) (one-way ANOVA). EDS analysis indicated the presence of F- only in G1. Dissolved precipitates after HF etching were removed by ultrasonic cleaning.Conclusion: Cleaning the HF-etched ceramic surface ultrasonically in distilled water is recommended, instead of rinsing it with air-water spray only.
Resumo:
Purpose: This study evaluated the efficacy of the union between two new self-etching self-adhesive resin cements and enamel using the microtensile bond strength test.Materials and Methods: Buccal enamel of 80 bovine teeth was submitted to finishing and polishing with metallographic paper to a refinement of #600, in order to obtain a 5-mm(2) flat area. Blocks (2 x 4 x 4 mm) of laboratory composite resin were cemented to enamel according to different protocols: (1) untreated enamel + RelyX Unicem cement (RX group); (2) untreated enamel + Bifix SE cement (BF group); (3) enamel acid etching and application of resin adhesive Single Bond + RelyX Unicem (RXA group); (4) enamel acid etching and application of resin adhesive Solobond M + Bifix SE (BFA group). After 7 days of storage in distillated water at 37 degrees C, the blocks were sectioned for obtaining microbar specimens with an adhesive area of 1 mm(2) (n = 120). Specimens were submitted to the microtensile bond strength test at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results (in MPa) were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tu key's test.Results: Enamel pre-treatment with phosphoric acid and resin adhesive (27.9 and 30.3 for RXA and BFA groups) significantly improved (p <= 0.05) the adhesion of both cements to enamel compared to the union achieved with as-polished enamel (9.9 and 6.0 for RX and BF).Conclusion: Enamel pre-treatment with acid etching and the application of resin adhesive significantly improved the bond efficacy of both luting agents compared to the union achieved with as-polished enamel.
Resumo:
Purpose: This study evaluated the bond strength of two etch-and-rinse adhesive systems (two- and three-step) and a self-etching system to Coronal and root canal dentin.Materials and Methods: The root canals of 30 human incisors and canines were instrumented and prepared with burs. The posts used for luting were duplicated with dual resin cement (Duo-link) inside Aestheti Plus #2 molds. Thus, three groups were formed (n = 10) according to the adhesive system employed: All-Bond 2 (TE3) + resin cement post (rcp) + Duo-link (DI); One-Step Plus (TE2) + rcp + DI; Tyrian/One-Step Plus (SE) + rcp + DI. Afterwards, 8 transverse sections (1.5 mm) were cut from 4 mm above the CEJ up to 4 mm short of the root canal apex, comprising coronal and root canal dentin. The sections were submitted to push-out testing in a universal testing machine EMIC (1 mm/min). Bond strength data were analyzed with two-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05).Results: The relationship between the adhesives was not the same in the different regions (p < 0.05). Comparison of the means achieved with the adhesives in each region (Tukey; p < 0.05) revealed that TE3 (mean standard deviation: 5.22 +/- 1.70) was higher than TE2 (2.60 +/- 1.74) and SE (1.68 +/- 1.85).Conclusion: Under the experimental conditions, better bonding to dentin was achieved using the three-step etch-and-rinse system, especially in the coronal region. Therefore, the traditional etch-and-rinse three-step adhesive system seems to be the best choice for teeth needing adhesive endodontic restorations.
Resumo:
Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of thermocycling (TC), self-adhesive resin cements and surface conditioning on the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) between feldspathic ceramic blocks and resin cements.Materials and Methods: Fifty-six feldspathic ceramic blocks (10 x 7 x 5 mm) (Vita Mark II) were divided into groups according to the factors "resin cement" (3 cements) and "surface conditioning" (no conditioning or conditioning [10% hydrofluoric acid etching for 5 min + silanization]) (n = 8): group 1: conditioning+Variolink II (control group); group 2: no conditioning+Biscem; group 3: no conditioning+RelyX U100; group 4: no conditioning+Maxcem Elite; group 5: conditioning+Biscem; group 6: conditioning+RelyX U100; group 7: conditioning+Maxcem Elite. The ceramic-cement blocks were sectioned to produce non-trimmed bar specimens (adhered cross-sectional area: 1 +/- 0.1 mm(2)), which were divided into two storage conditions: dry, mu TBS immediately after cutting; TC (12,000x, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C). Statistical significance was deterimined using two-way ANOVA (7 strategies and 2 storage conditions) and the post-hoc Tukey test (p<0.05).Results: Resin cement and thermocycling affected the mu TBS significantly (p = 0.001). In the dry condition, group 5 (18 +/- 6.5 MPa) presented the lowest values of mu TBS when compared to the other groups. TC decreased the mean mu TBS values significantly (p<0.05) for all resin cements tested (9.7 +/- 2.3 to 22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa), except for the resin cement RelyX U100 (22.1 +/- 6.3 MPa). In groups 3 and 4, it was not possible to measure mu TBS, since these groups had 100% pre-test failures during sectioning. Moreover, the same occurred in group 2 after TC, where 100% failure was observed during thermocycling (spontaneous failures).Conclusion: Hydrofluoric acid etching and silanization of the feldspathic ceramic surface are essential for bonding self-adhesive resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used. Non-etched ceramic is not recommended.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
This study evaluated the cohesive strength of composite using self-etching adhesive systems (SE) in the lubrication of instruments between layers of composite. The specimens were made by using a Teflon (R) device. SE were used at the interface to lubricate the instruments: Group 1(G1) - control group, no lubricant was used; Group 2(G2) -Futurabond (R) M; Group 3(G3) - Optibond (R) All-In-One; Group 4(G4) - Clearfil (R) SE Bond; Group 5(G5) - Futurabond (R) NR; Group 6(G6) - Adper (R) SE Plus; Group 7(G7) - One Up Bond (R) F. Specimens were submitted to the tensile test to evaluate the cohesive strength. Data were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey tests. ANOVA showed a value of p = 0.00. The average means (SD): G2 = 11.33(+/-3.44) a, G3 = 15.36(+/-4.06) ab, G4 = 18.9(+/-4.72) bc, G7 = 19.62(+/-4.46) bc, G5 = 21.02(+/-5.09) bc, G6 = 23.39(+/-4.17) cd, and G1 = 28.49(+/-2.89) d. All SE decreased the cohesive strength of the composite, except for Adper (R) SE Plus.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the bond strength of indirect restorations to dentin using self-adhesive cements with and without the application of adhesive systems.Material and Methods: Seventy-two bovine incisors were used, in which the buccal surfaces were ground down to expose an area of dentin measuring a minimum of 4 x 4 mm. The indirect resin composite Resilab was used to make 72 blocks, which were cemented onto the dentin surface of the teeth and divided into 4 groups (n = 18): group 1: self-adhesive resin cement BiFix SE, applied according to manufacturer's recommendations; group 2: self-adhesive resin cement RelyX Unicem, used according to manufacturer's recommendations; group 3: etch-and-rinse Solobond M adhesive system + BiFix SE; group 4: etch-and-rinse Single Bond 2 adhesive system + RelyX Unicem. The specimens were sectioned into sticks and subjected to microtensile testing in a universal testing machine (EMIC DL-200MF). Data were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha = 5%).Results: The mean values (+/- standard deviation) obtained for the groups were: group 1: 15.28 (+/- 8.17)(a), group 2: 14.60 (+/- 5.21)(a), group 3: 39.20 (+/- 9.98)(c), group 4: 27.59 (+/- 6.57)(b). Different letters indicate significant differences (ANOVA; p = 0.0000).Conclusion: The application of adhesive systems before self-adhesive cements significantly increased the bond strength to dentin. In group 2, RelyX Unicem associated with the adhesive system Single Bond 2 showed significantly lower mean tensile bond strengths than group 3 (BiFix SE associated with the etch-and-rinse Solobond M adhesive system).
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Background and Objectives. The adhesion of dental materials is important for the success of treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the bond strength of a composite resin applied with a self-etching adhesive system in different dentins after irradiation with Er:YAG and Nd:YAG lasers, observing their morphologic pattern using Scanning Electronic Microscopy (SEM). Materials and Methods. The buccal surface of 72 bovine incisors was worn until exposure of medium depth dentin. The specimens were divided into three groups; GI: normal, GII: demineralized and GIII: hypermineralized dentin. These were also divided into two subgroups; A-irradiated for 30 s with Er:YAG laser in noncontact mode at 40 mJ and 6 Hz and B- irradiated for 30 s with Nd:YAG laser in contact mode at 60 mJ and 10 Hz. The adhesive system Clearfil SE. Bond (Kuraray) and composite resin Tetric Ceram (Vivadent) were applied on the irradiated area by the incremental technique. After storage for 24 h in distilled water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were submitted to the shear strength test in a universal testing machine (EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Other specimens were made to be analyzed by SEM. Results. The results were statistically analyzed by Analysis of Variance and the Tukey test. Regardless of the type of dentin, the bond strength of specimens irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser (8,94 +/- 2,07) was higher compared to specimens irradiated with the Er:YAG laser (7,03 +/- 2,47); the highest bond strength was obtained for the group of hypermineralized dentin irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser. The SEM analysis showed that the Er:YAG laser caused opening of tubules and the Nd:YAG laser produced areas of fusion as well as regions of opening of dentinal tubules. Conclusions. The dentin showed different morphological patterns and the laser promote alterations on their surfaces, influencing the bond strength of the composite resin. (C) 2010 Laser Institute of America.