Adição de geomanta e tecido não tecido de polipropileno em cimentos geopoliméricos de pega rápida

Geopolymers are cementing materials that depict a number of advantages compared to Portland cement. Contrary to the latter, geopolymers are synthesized at room temperature, thus significantly reducing the emission of CO2 to the atmosphere. Moreover, the composition and synthesis reactions can be tailored to adjust the setting time of the material as well as its compressive mechanical strength. It is then possible to produce geopolymeric cements with short setting times and high compressive strength, although relatively brittle. The objective of the present study was to produce and characterize composite materials by reinforcing fastsetting geopolymeric matrixes with polypropylene geosynthetics (geomats and geotextiles) in an attempt to improve the toughness and tensile strength of the cementing material. Geosynthetics have been increasingly used to reinforce engineering structures, providing higher strength and better toughness. In particular, polypropylene nonwoven and geomats depict other attractive properties such as low density, durability, impact absorption and resistance to abrasion. Fast-setting geopolymers were then synthesized and reinforced with polypropylene nonwoven and geomats. The mechanical strength of the materials, reinforced or not, was characterized. The results showed that relatively short setting times and adequate flowing behavior were achieved by adjusting the composition of the geopolymer. In addition, it is possible to improve the fracture resistance of geopolymeric cements by adding polypropylene geosynthetics. The best results were achieved by reinforcing geopolymer with polypropylene TNT

Open photoacoustic cell for thermal diffusivity measurements of a fast hardening cement used in dental restoring

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Response of human pulps capped with different self-etch adhesive systems

The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of human pulps capped with a calcium hydroxide hard-setting cement or with two-step self-etch adhesive systems. Pulp exposures were performed on the occlusal floor, and the bleeding control was performed with saline solution. The exposed pulp tissue was capped with Clearfil LB 2V (2V) or Clearfil SE Bond (SE) and restored with a composite resin. In control group, the pulpal wound was capped with Ca(OH)(2) cement and restored with Clearfil LB 2V or Clearfil SE Bond + composite resin. After 30 and 90 days, the teeth were extracted, processed for hematoxylin and eosin, and categorized in a histological score system. The pulpal response was worse for groups capped with the self-etch adhesive systems (2V and SE) in both periods of evaluation, when compared to their respective control groups at 90 days (p < 0.05). For both self-etch systems evaluated, the pulp tissue exhibited moderate to severe inflammatory cell infiltrate involving the coronal pulp with chronic abscesses. Dentin bridging was observed in a few specimens. For the calcium hydroxide groups, almost all specimens showed dentin bridge formation, with few scattered inflammatory cells and normal tissue below the pulp exposure site. Calcium hydroxide should be used as the material of choice for pulp capping, and the use of two-step self-etch adhesives for human pulp capping is contraindicated.

Influence of Er,Cr: YSGG laser on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement

The purpose of this study was to investigate the bond strength of fiber post previously laser treated root canals. Forty single-rooted bovine teeth were endodontically treated, randomly and equally divided into two main groups according to the type of pretreatment: G1: 2.5% NaOCl (control group); and G2: Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Each group was further subdivided into 2 groups based on the category of adhesive systems/ luting materials used: a: an etch-and-rinse resin cement (Single Bond/RelyX ARC; 3M ESPE), and b: a self-adhesive resin cement (Rely X Unicem; 3M ESPE). Three 1.5 mm thick slabs were obtained per root and the push-out test was performed at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min until post dislodgement occurred. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey's test at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. Analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) among the groups G1a (25.44 ± 2.35) and G1b (23.62 ± 3.48), G2a (11.77 ± 2.67) and G2b (9.93 ± 3.37). Fractures were observed at the interface between the dentin and the resin in all groups. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation did not influence on the bond strength of the resin cements and the etch-and-rinse resin cement had better results on bond strength than self-adhesive resin cement.

Bond strength of Epiphany (TM) Sealer combined with different adhesive systems photo-activated with LED and QTH

The Epiphany (TM) Sealer is a new dual-curing resin-based sealer and has been introduced as an alternative to gutta-percha and traditional root canal sealers. The canal filling is claimed to create a seal with the dentinal tubules within the root canal system producing a 'monoblock' effect between the sealer and dentinal tubules. Therefore, considering the possibility to incorporate the others adhesive systems, it is important to study the bond strength of the resulting cement. Forty-eight root mandibular canines were sectioned 8-mm below CEJ. The dentine discs were prepared using a tapered diamond bur and irrigated with 1% NaOCl and 17% EDTA. Previous the application Epiphany (TM) Sealer, the Epiphany (TM) Primer, AdheSE, and One Up Bond F were applied to the root canal walls. The LED and QTH (Quartz Tungsten Halogen) were used to photo-activation during 45 s with power density of 400 and 720 mW/cm(2), respectively. The specimens were performed on a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until bond failure occurred. The force was recorded and the debonding values were used to calculate Push-out bond strength. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's post-hoc tests showed significant statistical differences (P < 0.05) to Epiphany (TM) Sealer/Epiphany (TM) Primer/QTH and EpiphanyTM Sealer/AdheSE/QTH, which had the highest mean values of bond strength. The efficiency of resin-based filling materials are dependent the type of light curing unit used including the power density, the polymerization characteristics of these resin-based filling materials, depending on the primer/adhesive used.

Effect of Resin Cement System and Root Region on the Push-out Bond Strength of a Translucent Fiber Post

Objectives: This study evaluated the bond strength of luting systems for bonding glass fiber posts to root canal dentin. The hypothesis tested was that there are no differences in bond strength of glass fiber posts luted with different cement systems.Methods: Forty bovine incisors were randomly assigned to five different resin cement groups (n=8). After endodontic treatment and crown removal, translucent glass fiber posts were bonded into the root canal using five different luting protocols (self-cured cement and etch-and-rinse adhesive system; dual-cured cement and etch-and-rinse adhesive system; self-cured cement and self-etch adhesive system; dual-cured cement and self-etch adhesive system; and dual-cured self-adhesive cement). Push-out bond strength was evaluated at three different radicular levels: cervical, middle, and apical. The interface between resinous cement and the post was observed using a stereoscopic microscope.Results: Analysis of variance showed a statistically significant difference among the cements (p<0.05) and the root canal thirds (p<0.05). The self-adhesive resinous cement had lower values of retention.Conclusions: The resin cements used with etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems seem to be adequate for glass fiber post cementation.

The adhesive system and root canal region do not influence the degree of conversion of dual resin cement

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Bond strengths, degree of conversion of the cement and molecular structure of the adhesive-dentine joint in fibre post restorations

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Evaluation of Bond Strength of Self-adhesive Cements to Dentin With or Without Application of Adhesive Systems

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).

The influence of internal surface treatments on tensile bond strength for two ceramic systems

Statement of the Problem: the ceramic composition and surface microstructure of all-ceramic restorations are important components of an effective bonding substrate. Hydrofluoric acid and sandblasting are well-known procedures for surface treatment; however, surface treatment for high alumina-containing and lithium disilicate ceramics have not been fully investigated.Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated the tensile bond strength of resin cement to two types of ceramic systems with different surface treatments.Methods and Materials: Thirty specimens of each ceramic system were made according to the manufacturer's instructions and embedded in polyester resin. Specimens of In-Ceram Alumina [1] and IPS Empress 2 [E] were distributed to three groups with differing surface treatments (n=10): sandblasting with 50 jam aluminum oxide (APA); sandblasting with 110 pm aluminum oxide modified with silica particles (ROCATEC System-RS); a combination of sandblasting with APA and 10% hydrofluoric acid etching (HA) for two minutes on In-Ceram and for 20 seconds for IPS Empress 2. After the respective surface treatments, all the specimens were silanated, and Rely-X resin cement was injected onto the ceramic surface and light polymerized. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours and thermally cycled 1,100 times (5 degrees C/55 degrees C). The tensile bond strength test was performed in a universal testing machine at a 0.5 mm/minute crosshead speed.Results: the mean bond strength values (AWa) for IPS Empress 2 were 12.01 +/- 5.93 (EAPA), 10.34 +/- 1.77 (ERS) and 14.49 +/- 3.04 (EHA). The mean bond strength values for In-Ceram Alumina were 9.87 +/- 2.40 JAPA) and 20.40 +/- 6.27 (IRS). All In-Ceram specimens treated with 10% hydrofluoric acid failed during thermal cycling.Conclusion: the Rocatec system was the most effective surface treatment for In-Ceram Alumina ceramics; whereas, the combination of aluminum oxide sandblasting and hydrofluoric acid etching for 20 seconds worked more effectively for Empress 2 ceramics.

Effect of ceramic surface treatment on the microtensile bond strength between a resin cement and an alumina-based ceramic

Purpose: The objective of this study was to test the following hypothesis: the silica coating on ceramic surface increases the bond strength of resin cement to a ceramic. Materials and Methods: In-Ceram Alumina blocks were made and the ceramic surface was treated: G1 - sandblasting with 110-μm aluminum oxide particles; G2 - Rocatec System: tribochemicai silica coating (Rocatec-Pre powder + Rocatec-Plus powder + Rocatec-Sil); G3 - CoJet System: silica coating (CoJet-Sand) + ESPE-Sil. The ceramic blocks were cemented to composite blocks with Panavia F resin cement (under a load of 750 g/1 min). The cemented blocks were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 7 days and sectioned along the x and y axes with a diamond disk. Samples with an adhesive area of ca 0.8 mm 2 (n = 45) were obtained. The samples were attached to an adapted device for the microtensile test, which was performed in a universal testing machine (EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Results: The obtained results were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test. Mean values of tensile strength (MPa) and standard deviation values were: (G1) 16.8 ± 3.2; (G2) 30.6 ± 4.5; (G3) 33.0 ± 5.0. G2 and 63 presented greater tensile strength than G1. There was no significant difference between G2 and G3. All the failures took place at the ceramic/resin cement interface. Conclusion: The silica coating (Rocatec or CoJet systems) of the ceramic surface increased the bond strength between the Panavia F resin cement and alumina-based ceramic.

The effect of adhesive systems on the pullout strength of a fiberglass-reinforced composite post system in bovine teeth

Purpose: To evaluate the pullout strength of a glass fiber-reinforced composite post (glass FRC) cemented with three different adhesive systems and one resin cement. The null hypothesis was that pullout strengths yielded by the adhesive systems are similar. Materials and Methods: Thirty bovine teeth were selected. The size of the specimens was standardized at 16 mm by sectioning off the coronal portion and part of the root. The specimens were divided into three groups, according to the adhesive system, which were applied following the manufacturers' instructions: G1, ScotchBond Multi-Purpose Plus; G2, Single Bond; G3, Tyrian SPE/One-Step Plus. The glass FRCs (Reforpost) were etched with 37% H3PO4 for 1 min and silanized (Porcelain Primer). Thereafter, they were cemented with the dual resin cement En-Force. The specimens were stored for 24 h, attached to an adapted device, and submitted to the pullout test in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). The data were submitted to the one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Results: G1 (30.2 ± 5.8 Kgf) displayed the highest pullout strength (p < 0.001) when compared to G2 (18.6 ± 5.8 Kgf) and G3 (14.3 ± 5.8 Kgf), which were statistically similar. Analysis of the specimens revealed that all failures occurred between the adhesive system and the root dentin (pullout of the post cement), regardless of group. Conclusion: The multiple-bottle, total-etch adhesive system provided higher pullout strength of the glass FRC when compared to the single-bottle, total-etch, and single-step self-etching adhesive systems. The null hypothesis was rejected (p < 0.001).

Effect of dentinal surface preparation on bond strength of self-etching adhesive systems

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dentin surface treatments on the tensile bond strength (TBS) of the self-etching primer Clearfil SE Bond (CSE) and the one-step self-etching One-Up Bond F (OUB). The exposed flat dentin surfaces of twenty-four sound third molars were prepared with diamond bur at high-speed, carbide bur at low-speed or wet ground with #600 grit SiC paper. The adhesive systems were applied to the dentin surfaces and light-cured according to the manufacturers' instructions. A 6-mm high composite crown was incrementally built-up and each increment was light-cured for 40 seconds. After being stored in water (37°C/24 h), the samples were serially sectioned parallel to the long axis, forming beams (n = 20) with a cross-sectional area of approximately 0.8 mm 2. The specimens were tested in a Universal Testing Machine at 0.5 mm/min. The cross-sectional area was measured and the results (MPa) were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey Test (p < 0.05). Overall, the groups treated with CSE exhibited the highest TBS for all surface treatments. Dentin surfaces prepared with carbide bur at low speed reduced TBS in the CSE group; however, OUB was not affected by surface treatments. The effect of surface abrasive methods on TBS was material-dependent.

Bond strength of adhesive systems to human tooth enamel

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vitro three adhesive systems: a total etching single-component system (G1 Prime & Bond 2.1), a self-etching primer (G2 Clearfil SE Bond), and a self-etching adhesive (G3 One Up Bond F), through shear bond strength to enamel of human teeth, evaluating the type of fracture through stereomicroscopy, following the ISO guidance on adhesive testing. Thirty sound premolars were bisected mesiodistally and the buccal and lingual surfaces were embedded in acrylic resin, polished up to 600-grit sandpapers, and randomly assigned to three experimental groups (n = 20). Composite resin cylinders were added to the tested surfaces. The specimens were kept in distilled water (37°C/24 h), thermocycled for 500 cycles (5°C-55°C) and submitted to shear testing at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The type of fracture was analyzed under stereomicroscopy and the data were submitted to Anova, Tukey and Chi-squared (5%) statistical analyses. The mean adhesive strengths were G1: 18.13 ± 6.49 MPa, (55% of resin cohesive fractures); G2: 17.12 ± 5.80 MPa (90% of adhesive fractures); and G3: 10.47 ± 3.14 MPa (85% of adhesive fractures). In terms of bond strength, there were no significant differences between G1 and G2, and G3 was significantly different from the other groups. G1 presented a different type of fracture from that of G2 and G3. In conclusion, although the total etching and self-etching systems presented similar shear bond strength values, the types of fracture presented by them were different, which can have clinical implications.

Tensile bond strength of self-etching versus total-etching adhesive systems under different dentinal substrate conditions

The use of acid etchants to produce surface demineralization and collagen network exposure, allowing adhesive monomers interdiffusion and consequently the formation of a hybrid layer, has been considered the most efficient mechanism of dentin bonding. The aim of this study was to compare the tensile bond strength to dentin of three adhesive systems, two self-etching ones (Clearfil SE Bond - CSEB and One Up Bond F - OUBF) and one total-etching one (Single Bond - SB), under three dentinal substrate conditions (wet, dry and re-wet). Ninety human, freshly extracted third molars were sectioned at the occlusal surface to remove enamel and to form a flat dentin wall. The specimens were restored with composite resin (Filtek Z250) and submitted to tensile bond strength testing (TBS) in an MTS 810. The data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p = 0.05). Wet dentin presented the highest TBS values for SB and CSEB. Dry dentin and re-wet produced significantly lower TBS values when using SB. OUBF was not affected by the different conditions of the dentin substrate, producing similar TBS values regardless of the surface pretreatments.