Bond integrity and microleakage of dentin-bonded crowns cemented with bioactive cement in comparison to resin cements: in vitro study

13Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: The aim was to compare restorative marginal integrity of ceramic crowns luted with bioactive and resin cements using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) microleakage evaluations and bond strength assessment. Methods: Thirty molar teeth were prepared by sectioning and polishing for dentin exposure for resin cement build-ups. Teeth were randomly divided among three groups of cements: (1) bioactive (ACTIVA); (2) glass ionomer cement (GIC; Ketac Cem); and (3) resin luting agent (Nexus 3). Bonding regime and build-ups (4 mm × 2 mm) were performed using the recommended protocol. For microleakage assessment, 30 premolar teeth were prepared for dentin-bonded crowns using lithium disilicate ceramic and the computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing technique. Crowns were cemented with standard load, cement amount, and duration using three cements (Group A: bioactive; Group B: GIC; Group C: resin) and photopolymerized. Cemented crowns were evaluated for volumetric infiltration using micro-CT (Skyscan, Bruker 1173- at 86 kV, 93 µA, 620 ms) after immersion in 50% solution of silver nitrate (AgNO3) (24 hours). Shear bond strength (SBS) was assessed by fracture of cement build-ups at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min in a universal testing machine. Results: Mean SBS among bioactive (21.54 ± 3.834 MPa) specimens was significantly higher than that for GIC (14.08 ± 3.25 MPa) specimens (p < 0.01), but they were comparable to resin samples (p > 0.05) (24.73 ± 4.32 MPa). Microleakage was significantly lower in crowns luted with bioactive (0.381 ± 0.134) cement compared to GIC (1.057 ± 0.399 mm3) (p < 0.01) and resin (0.734 ± 0.166 mm3) (p = 0.014) cemented crowns. The type of luting agent had a significant influence on the microleakage of crowns and bond strength to dentin (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Bioactive cement exhibited less microleakage and comparable SBS to resin luting agents in in vitro conditions.

References Powered by Scopus

Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: A systematic review

683Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: A systematic review

298Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: A literature review

251Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Influence of conventional, CAD-CAM, and 3D printing fabrication techniques on the marginal integrity and surface roughness and wear of interim crowns

33Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Assessment of Caries-Affected Dentin Adhesive Interface Treated with Contemporary Conditioning Techniques

23Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Micro-computed tomography in preventive and restorative dental research: A review

18Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vohra, F., Altwaim, M., Alshuwaier, A. S., Alomayri, A., Al Deeb, M., AlFawaz, Y. F., … Abduljabbar, T. (2020). Bond integrity and microleakage of dentin-bonded crowns cemented with bioactive cement in comparison to resin cements: in vitro study. Journal of Applied Biomaterials and Functional Materials, 18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2280800020905768

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 13

65%

Lecturer / Post doc 5

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

5%

Researcher 1

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 24

86%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 2

7%

Arts and Humanities 1

4%

Computer Science 1

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free