medigraphic.com
ISSN 1659-1046 (Print)
Odovtos - International Journal of Dental Sciences

2016, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Odovtos-Int J Dent Sc 2016; 18 (1)

Effect of Activation Mode on Flexural Strength and Elasticity Modulus of Dual Cure Resin Cements

Guimaraes IR, Murillo GF, De Goes MF

Language: English
References: 29
Page: 61-71
PDF size: 231.16 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: This study evaluated the effect of the activation mode on flexural strength and elasticity modulus of four dual cure resin-based cements. Methods: Two self-adhesive resin cements (Clearfil SA Cement (CSA) and RelyX U100 (U)) and two conventional resin cements (Clearfil Esthetic Cement (CE)and RelyX ARC (ARC)) were used to produce a total of 45 bar specimens (7x2x2 mm) using three different activation modes (n=15): Direct light-cure (D), Indirect light-cure using a 2mm composite resin barrier (I) and Self-cure (S). Three-point flexural tests were performed after 24 hours water storage at 37° C, using a universal testing machine (Instron) at a cross-speed of 0.5 mm/min until fracture. Flexural strength (MPa) and elasticity modulus values were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey’s Test ( =0.05). Results: Data revealed that light polymerized groups presented statistically higher flexural strength (CSA/D=113.63 ± 19.65; CSA/I=80.66 ± 23.74; U/D=101.33 ± 9.8; U/I=94.96 ± 36.9; CE/D=219.08 ± 39.94; CE/I=226.42 ± 34.59; ARC/D=150.03 ± 26.15; ARC/I=111.78 ± 14.28) and also elasticity modulus values (CSA/D = 2.9 ± 0.6; CSA/I = 1.5 ± 0.4; U/D = 2.9 ± 0.5; U/I = 2.6 ± 1.4; CE/D = 6.5 ± 1.3; CE/I = 5.8 ± 1.0; ARC/D = 4.2 ± 0.93; ARC/I = 2.5 ± 0.5) compared to self-cured groups (flexural strength: CSA/S=65.81 ± 21.84; U/S=53.62 ± 28.73; CE/S=129.02 ± 51.67; ARC/S=77.98 ±19.61 and elasticity modulus: CSA/S = 1.4 ± 0.5; U/S = 1.2 ± 0.7; CE/S = 2.2 ± 1.5; ARC/S = 1.0 ± 0.5). The usage of a composite resin barrier only affected the mechanical properties of ARC and CSA. Conventional resin cements presented higher flexural strength values than the self-adhesive cements. CE presented the highest values compared to all other cements. No statistical difference was observed between self-adhesive cements. Conclusion: Light-curing of resin luting cements produced higher flexural strength for all tested materials. Similar mechanical behavior was observed for the tested self-adhesive cements.


REFERENCES

  1. Burke F. J. Trends in indirect dentistry: 3. Luting materials. Dent Update. 2005 Jun; 32(5): 251-4, 257-8, 260.

  2. Christensen G. J. The rise of resin for cementing restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 1993 Oct; 124(10): 104-5.

  3. Tsukada G., Tokiwa K., Yamashita H., Ijichi H., Nagaoka S., Inoue K. Setting characteristics of resin cements. Japanese Journal of conservative dentistry. 1995 38 415-421.

  4. Asmussen E., Peutzfeldt A. Bonding of dualcuring resin cements to dentin. J Adhes Dent. 2006 Oct; 8(5):299-304.

  5. Hasegawa E. A., Boyer D. B., Chan D. C. Hardening of dual-cured cements under composite resin inlays. J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Aug; 66(2):187-92.

  6. El-Mowafy O. M., Rubo M. H., el-Badrawy W. A. Hardening of new resin cements cured through a ceramic inlay. Oper Dent. 1999 Jan-Feb;24(1):38-44.

  7. Arrais C. A., Miyake K., Rueggeberg F. A., Pashley D. H., Giannini M. Micromorphology of resin/dentin interfaces using 4th and 5th generation dual-curing adhesive/cement systems: a confocal laser scanning microscope analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2009 Feb; 11(1):15-26.

  8. Breeding L. C., Dixon D. L., Caughman W. F. The curing potential of light-activated composite resin luting agents. J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Apr; 65 (4): 512-8.

  9. Rode K. M., Kawano Y., Turbino M. L. Evaluation of curing light distance on resin composite microhardness and polymerization. Oper Dent 2007; 32: 517-8.

  10. Rueggeberg F. A., Craig R. G. Correlation of parameters used to estimate monomer conversion in a light-cured composite. J Dent Res. 1988 Jun; 67(6):932-7.

  11. 3M ESPE Product Profile.

  12. Diaz-Arnold A. M., Vargas M. A., Haselton D. R. Current status of luting agents for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1999 Feb; 81(2):135-41.

  13. De Munck J., Vargas M., Van Landuyt K., Hikita K., Lambrechts P., Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater.2004 Dec; 20(10):963-71.

  14. Tezvergil-Mutluay A., Lassila L. V., Vallittu P. K. Degree of conversion of dual-cure luting resins light-polymerized through various materials. Acta Odontol Scand. 2007 Aug; 65(4):201-5.

  15. Saskalauskaite E., Tam L. E., McComb D. Flexural strength, elastic modulus, and pH profile of self-etch resin luting cements. J Prosthodont. 2008 Jun; 17(4):262-8.

  16. Li Z. C., White S. N. Mechanical properties of dental luting cements. J Prosthet Dent. 1999 May; 81(5):597-609.

  17. Hofmann N., Papsthart G., Hugo B., Klaiber B. Comparison of photo-activation versus chemical or dual-curing of resin-based luting cements regarding flexural strength, modulus and surface hardness. J Oral Rehabil. 2001 Nov; 28(11):1022-8.

  18. Braga R. R., Cesar P. F., Gonzaga C. C. Mechanical properties of resin cements with different activation modes. J Oral Rehabil. 2002 Mar; 29 (3): 257-62.

  19. Rueggeberg F. A., Caughman W. F. The influence of light exposure on polymerization of dual-cure resin cements. Oper Dent. 1993 Mar-Apr; 18(2):48-55.

  20. Pace L. L., Hummel S. K., Marker V. A., Bolouri A. Comparison of the flexural strength of five adhesive resin cements. J Prosthodont. 2007 Jan-Feb;16(1):18-24.

  21. Cook W. D., Standish P. M. Polymerization kinetics of resin-based restorative materials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1983 Mar;17(2):275-82.

  22. Chung K. H., Greener E. H. Correlation between degree of conversion, filler concentration and mechanical properties of posterior composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 1990 Sep; 17(5):487-94.

  23. Asmussen E., Peutzfeldt A. Influence of UEDMA BisGMA and TEGDMA on selected mechanical properties of experimental resin composites. Dent Mater. 1998 Jan; 14(1):51-6.

  24. Rueggeberg F. A., Craig R. G. Correlation of parameters used to estimate monomer conversion in a light-cured composite. J Dent Res. 1988 Jun; 67(6):932-7.

  25. Arrais C. A., Miyake K., Rueggeberg F. A., Pashley DH, Giannini M. Micromorphology of resin/dentin interfaces using 4th and 5th generation dual-curing adhesive/ cement systems: a confocal laser scanning microscope analysis. J Adhes Dent. 2009 Feb; 11(1):15-26.

  26. Ferracane J. L., Greener E. H. The effect of resin formulation on the degree of conversion and mechanical properties of dental restorative resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 1986 Jan; 20(1):121-31.

  27. Rueggeberg F. A., Cole M. A., Looney S. W., Vickers A., Swift E. J. Comparison of manufacturer-recommended exposure durations with those determined using biaxial flexure strength and scraped composite thickness among a variety of light-curing units. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2009;21(1):43-61.

  28. Alster D., Feilzer A. J., De Gee A. J., Mol A., Davidson C. L. The dependence of shrinkage stress reduction on porosity concentration in thin resin layers. J Dent Res. 1992 Sep; 71(9):1619-22. Erratum in: J Dent Res 1993 Jan; 72(1):87.

  29. Pegoraro T. A., da Silva N. R., Carvalho R. M. Cements for use in esthetic dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 2007 Apr; 51(2):453-71.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com