IADR Abstract Archives
Characterisation of the Film Thickness and the Bond Strength Reliability of a Bioactive Calcium Aluminate/Glass-Ionomer Cement (CaAl/GIC) to Lithium Disilicate (LD) and Dentine
Objectives: Firstly to determine the effect of temperature (5° C, 23 °C, 30° C) on the film thickness of a new CaAL/GIC, self-adhesive resin cement (SARC), resin cement (RC) and glass-ionomer cement (GIC) in comparison to the ISO 9917-1:2007 and ISO 404:2009 standards. Secondly, to assess the bond strength of CaAL/GIC (Ceramir C & B), SARC (RelyX Unicem 2), RC (Panavia V5) and GIC (Fuji I) to LD and dentine. Thirdly, to test the influence of water storage on the bond quality and, fourth, analyse the fracture interface microscopically for bond reliability and fracture type.
Methods: The ISO 1977-1:2003 protocol was used to determine the film thickness of the dental cements at 5 °C, 23 °C and 30 °C. For the bond strength test, eighty dentine surfaces and eighty monolithic lithium were divided into four groups, each with a different type of dental cement. Within each group, 20 LD discs were luted onto 20 dentine surfaces with a specific dental cement. Then 10 specimens were stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours and 10 specimens for 28 days. Each specimen was then subjected to a macro shear bond strength test at a 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed, fractography and data analysis (one-way (ANOVA) analysis of variance and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test and at a significance level of 5%).
Results: The results for the film thickness test indicate that all the luting cements at the three specific temperatures had a film thickness below 25 µm and meets the ISO standards. The temperature and type of cement had no statistical effect on the film thickness. There was a significant difference between the SBS of the polymer-based cement (RelyX Unicem 2 (13.17 ± 3.80) and Panavia V5 (12.95 ± 2.62)) compared to acid-based cement (Ceramir C & B (3.06 ± 1.73) and GIC Fuji I (2.91 ± 1.07) (p <0.05.). The effect of water storage as a mode of aging had a significant effect (P<0.05) on RelyX Unicem 2 and no statistically effect on the other dental cements. Dentine surfaces showed 79% of mixed failure, 16% cohesive failure and 5% complete adhesive failure with dentine. LD surfaces showed 57% mixed failure, 14% cohesive failure and 29% complete adhesive failure.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, Ceramir C & B has comparable bond strength to GIC (Fuji 1), and its film thickness is within the ISO standard.
Methods: The ISO 1977-1:2003 protocol was used to determine the film thickness of the dental cements at 5 °C, 23 °C and 30 °C. For the bond strength test, eighty dentine surfaces and eighty monolithic lithium were divided into four groups, each with a different type of dental cement. Within each group, 20 LD discs were luted onto 20 dentine surfaces with a specific dental cement. Then 10 specimens were stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours and 10 specimens for 28 days. Each specimen was then subjected to a macro shear bond strength test at a 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed, fractography and data analysis (one-way (ANOVA) analysis of variance and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test and at a significance level of 5%).
Results: The results for the film thickness test indicate that all the luting cements at the three specific temperatures had a film thickness below 25 µm and meets the ISO standards. The temperature and type of cement had no statistical effect on the film thickness. There was a significant difference between the SBS of the polymer-based cement (RelyX Unicem 2 (13.17 ± 3.80) and Panavia V5 (12.95 ± 2.62)) compared to acid-based cement (Ceramir C & B (3.06 ± 1.73) and GIC Fuji I (2.91 ± 1.07) (p <0.05.). The effect of water storage as a mode of aging had a significant effect (P<0.05) on RelyX Unicem 2 and no statistically effect on the other dental cements. Dentine surfaces showed 79% of mixed failure, 16% cohesive failure and 5% complete adhesive failure with dentine. LD surfaces showed 57% mixed failure, 14% cohesive failure and 29% complete adhesive failure.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, Ceramir C & B has comparable bond strength to GIC (Fuji 1), and its film thickness is within the ISO standard.