Effect of Waiting Interval Before Light Curing on Bond Strength of Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement Under Simulated Pulp Pressure

Article Sidebar

Vol.39 No.1 2018
PDF
Published: Mar 30, 2018
Keywords:
resin modified glass ionomer cement waiting interval pulp pressure microtensile bond strength

Main Article Content

Pantipa Butda
Department of Dental Hospital, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Thailand
Taweesak Prasansuttiporn
Department of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Ornnicha Thanatvarakorn
Faculty of Dentistry, Bangkokthonburi University, Thailand
Sumana Jittidecharaks
Department of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chiang Mai University, Thailand

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of waiting interval before light curing on dentin bond strength of resin modified glass ionomer cement under simulated pulpal pressure condition.


Methods: Ninety extracted third molars were used in this study. The occlusal enamel was ground to expose a flat surface of dentin. Dental root and pulp were removed. The tooth segments were attached to pulp pressure stimulation in order to produce a pressure of 15 cmH2O at the dentine surface. The teeth were randomly assigned into 2 groups, 40 of each restorative material: Fuji II LC® and VitrebondTM  Plus. Each material group was divided into 5 subgroups of waiting interval before light curing: immediate, 1-, 2-, 3- and 4-min delayed light-curing. All bonded teeth were sectioned to beam-shaped specimens at a cross-sectional area of 1 mm2 and then subjected to the microtensile bond test. The debonded specimens were determined for failure mode by scanning electron microscope (SEM). The ata were analysed by one-way ANOVA analysis, Duncan’s multiple-range test and independent t-test at the confidence level of 95%.


Results: There were significant differences among various waiting interval groups (VitrebondTM Plus p<0.001, Fuji II LC® p=0.02). For VitrebondTM Plus with 2- and 3-min delayed light-curing showed the highest microtensile bond strength. For Fuji II LC® with immediate light curing, 1- and 2-min delayed light-curing showed the highest bond strength. VitrebondTM Plus showed more significantly adhesive failure than Fuji II LC® at all waiting intervals.


Conclusions: The proper waiting intervals before light curing in RMGIs was different. In present study, the proper time to start light-curing was 2-3 min after placement for VitrebondTM Plus and immediate to 2-3 min after placement for Fuji II LC®.

Article Details

How to Cite
Butda, P. ., Prasansuttiporn, T. ., Thanatvarakorn, O. ., & Jittidecharaks, S. . (2018). Effect of Waiting Interval Before Light Curing on Bond Strength of Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement Under Simulated Pulp Pressure. Chiang Mai Dental Journal, 39(1), 113–125. Retrieved from https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/cmdj/article/view/197578
Issue
Vol. 39 No. 1 (2018): January-April
Section
Original article

References

McCabe JF. Resin-modified glass-ionomers. Biomaterials. 1998; 19(6): 521-527.

Mathis RS, Ferracane JL. Properties of a glass-ionomer/resin-composite hybrid material. Dent Mater. 1989; 5(5): 355-358.

Fruits TJ, Coury TL, Miranda FJ, Duncanson MG, Jr. Uses and properties of current glass ionomer cements: a review. Gen Dent. 1996; 44(5): 410-418; quiz 421-412.

Kupradit P. Resin modified glass ionomer cement in operative dentistry. KDJ. 2003; 6(2): 109-120.

Albers HF. Tooth-colored Restoratives: Principles and Techniques: PMPH-USA; 2002.

Abdalla AI. Morphological interface between hybrid ionomers and dentin with and without smear-layer removal. J Oral Rehabil. 2000; 27(9): 808-814.

Mauro SJ, Sundfeld RH, Bedran-Russo AKB, Fraga Briso ALF. Bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer to dentin: the effect of dentin surface treatment. J Minim Interv Dent. 2009; 2(1): 45-53.

Bishara SE, VonWald L, Laffoon JF, Jakobsen JR. Effect of changing enamel conditioner concentration on the shear bond strength of a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118(3): 311-316.

Hamama HH, Burrow MF, Yiu C. Effect of dentine conditioning on adhesion of resin-modified glass ionomer adhesives. Aust Dent J. 2014; 59(2): 193-200.

Poggio C, Beltrami R, Scribante A, Colombo M, Lombardini M. Effects of dentin surface treatments on shear bond strength of glass-ionomer cements. Ann Stomatol (Roma). 2014; 5(1): 15-22.

Salz U, Bock T. Testing adhesion of direct restoratives to dental hard tissue - a review. J Adhes Dent. 2010; 12(5): 343-371.

Pereira PN, Sano H, Ogata M, et al. Effect of region and dentin perfusion on bond strengths of resin-modified glass ionomer cements. J Dent. 2000; 28(5): 347-354.

Berzins DW, Abey S, Costache MC, Wilkie CA, Roberts HW. Resin-modified glass-ionomer setting reaction competition. J Dent Res. 2010; 89(1): 82-86.

Wilson AD, Nicholson JW. Acid-base Cement: Their Biomedical and Industrial Applications. Cambridge University Press 2005. p.420.

Kakaboura A, Eliades G, Palaghias G. An FTIR study on the setting mechanism of resin-modified glass ionomer restoratives. Dent Mater. 1996; 12(3): 173-178.

Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003; 28(3): 215-235.

Dursun E, Nguyen JF, Tang ML, Attal JP, Sadoun M. HEMA release and degree of conversion from a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after various delays of light activation. Dent Mater. 2016; 32(5): 640-645.

Nicholson JW, Anstice HM. The physical chemistry of light-curable glass-ionomers. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1994; 5(3): 119-122.

Van Landuyt K, De Munck J, Coutinho E, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding to dentin: smear layer and the process of hybridization. In: Eliades G, Watts D, Eliades T, editors. Dental Hard Tissues and Bonding Interfacial Phenomena and Related Properties. Springer: Heidelberg, Germany; 2005. p. 89-122.

Tani C, Finger WJ. Effect of smear layer thickness on bond strength mediated by three all-in-one self-etching priming adhesives. J Adhes Dent. 2002; 4(4): 283-289.

Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent. 1997; 25(5): 355-372.

Powis DR, Folleras T, Merson SA, Wilson AD. Improved adhesion of a glass ionomer cement to dentin and enamel. J Dent Res. 1982; 61(12): 1416-1422.

Tanumiharja M, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Microtensile bond strengths of glass ionomer (polyalkenoate) cements to dentine using four conditioners. J Dent. 2000; 28(5): 361-366.

Imbery TA, Namboodiri A, Duncan A, Amos R, Best AM, Moon PC. Evaluating dentin surface treatments for resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2013; 38(4): 429-438.

Pashley DH, Livingston MJ, Greenhill JD. Regional resistances to fluid flow in human dentine in vitro. Arch Oral Biol. 1978; 23(9): 807-810.

Dippel HW, Borggreven JM, Hoppenbrouwers PM. Morphology and permeability of the dentinal smear layer. J Prosthet Dent. 1984; 52(5): 657-662.

Shafiei F, Yousefipour B, Farhadpour H. Marginal microleakage of a resin-modified glass-ionomer restoration: Interaction effect of delayed light activation and surface pretreatment. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2015; 12(3): 224-230.

Garg N, Garg A. Bonding to Eanmel and Dentin. In: Garg N, editor. Textbook of Operative Dentistry. Ajanta Offset & Packagings Ltd, New Delhi: Japee Brothers Medical Publisher Ltd; 2012. p. 291-294.

Coutinho E, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, et al. Gel phase formation at resin-modified glass-ionomer/tooth interfaces. J Dent Res. 2007; 86(7): 656-661.

Sidhu SK, Sherriff M, Watson TF. Failure of resin-modified glass-ionomers subjected to shear loading. J Dent. 1999; 27(5): 373-381.

Tay FR, Sidhu SK, Watson TF, Pashley DH. Water-dependent interfacial transition zone in resin-modified glass-ionomer cement/dentin interfaces. J Dent Res. 2004; 83(8): 644-649.

Sidhu SK, Pilecki P, Cheng PC, Watson TF. The morphology and stability of resin-modified glass-ionomer adhesive at the dentin/resin-based composite interface. Am J Dent. 2002; 15(2): 129-136.