Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Influence of ultrasound application on inlays luting with self-adhesive resin cements

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study was aimed at assessing the influence of the cement manipulation and ultrasounds application on the bonding potential of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin by microtensile bond strength testing and microscopic observations of the interface. Fifty-six standardized mesio-occlusal class II cavities were prepared in extracted third molars. Class II inlays were made using the nano-hybrid resin composite Gradia Forte (GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan), following the manufacturer’s instruction. The sample was randomly divided into two groups (n = 28) according to the luting technique. Half of the specimens were luted under a static seating pressure (P), while the other ones were cemented under vibration (V). The inlays were luted using the following self-adhesive resin cements: G-Cem (G, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan) Automix (GA) and Capsule (GC); RelyX Unicem (RU, 3 M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) Clicker (RUC) and Aplicap (RUA). Microtensile sticks and specimens for scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations were obtained from the luted teeth. The interfacial strengths measured for the cements under static pressure or ultrasonic vibration were [median (interquartile range)]: GC/V 4 (2.3–7.9); GC/P 6.8 (4.1–10.1); GA/V 3 (1.9–6.7); GA/P 1.9 (0–5.1); RUC/V 6.6 (4.6–9.8); RUC/P 4.1 (1.8–6.4); RUA/V 6.2 (2.4–10.4); RUA/P 3.4 (0–5.4). The cement formulation influenced dentin bond strength of G. RU bond strength was affected by the luting technique. SEM analysis revealed a homogeneous structure and reduced porosities for both cements as a result of ultrasonic vibration. RU benefited from the application of ultrasounds, while GC achieved higher bond strengths than GA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sensat ML, Brackett WW, Meinberg TA, Beatty MW (2002) Clinical evaluation of two adhesive composite cements for the suppression of dentinal cold sensitivity. J Prosthet Dent 88:50–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. De Souza Costa CA, Hebling J, Randall R (2006) Human pulp response to resin cements used to bond inlay restorations. Dent Mater 22:954–962

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, Zuchner H, Schafer E (2006) Chemical analysis and bonding reaction of RelyX Unicem and Bifix composites—a comparative study. Dent Mater 22:934–941

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cantoro A, Goracci C, Carvalho CA, Coniglio I, Ferrari M (2009) Bonding potential of self-adhesive luting agents used at different temperatures to lute composite onlays. J Dent 37:454–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Holderegger C, Sailer I, Schuhmacher C, Schläpfer R, Hämmerle C, Fischer J (2008) Shear bond strength of resin cements to human dentin. Dent Mater 24:944–950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M (2008) Limited decalcification/diffusion of self-adhesive cements into dentin. J Dent Res 87:974–979

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2004) Bonding of a self-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 20:963–971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yang B, Ludwig K, Adelung R, Kern M (2006) Micro-tensile bond strength of three luting resins to human regional dentin. Dent Mater 22:45–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goracci C, Cury AH, Cantoro A, Papacchini F, Tay FR, Ferrari M (2006) Microtensile bond strength and interfacial properties of self-etching and self-adhesive resin cements used to lute composite onlays under different seating forces. J Adhes Dent 8:327–335

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cantoro A, Goracci C, Papacchini F, Mazzitelli C, Fadda GM, Ferrari M (2008) Effect of pre-cure temperature on the bonding potential of self-etch and self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 24:577–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Judge RB, Wilson PR (2001) The effect of oscillating force upon the flow of dental cements. J Oral Rehabil 26:892–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schmidlin PR, Zehnder M, Schlup-Mityko C, Ghring TN (2005) Interface evaluation after manual and ultrasonic insertion of standardized class I inlays using composite resin materials of different viscosity. Acta Odontol Scand 63:205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Towler MR, Crowley CM, Hill RG (2003) Investigation into the ultrasonic setting of glass ionomer cement: PART I: postulated modalities. J Mater Sci Lett 22:539–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Twomey E, Towler MR, Crowley CM, Doyle J, Hampshire S (2004) Investigation into the ultrasonic setting of glass ionomer cements. Part II: setting times and compressive strengths. J Mater Sci 39:4631–4632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Towler MR, Bushby AJ, Billington RW, Hill RG (2001) A preliminary comparison of the mechanical properties of chemically cured and ultrasonically cured glass ionomer cements, using nano-indentation techniques. Biomaterials 22:1401–1406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Algera TJ, Kleverlaan CJ, de Gee AJ, Prahl-Andersen B, Feilzer AJ (2005) The influence of accelerating the setting rate by ultrasound or heat on the bond strength of glass ionomers used as orthodontic bracket cements. Eur J Orthod 27:472–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Junge T, Nicholls JI, Phillips KM, Wj L (1998) Load fatigue of compromised teeth: a comparison of 3 luting agents. Int J Prosthodont 11:558–564

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Peutzfeldt A (1994) Effect of the ultrasonic insertion technique on the seating of composite inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 52:51–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Han L, Okamoto A, Fukushima M, Okiji T (2007) Evaluation of physical properties and surface degradation of self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 26:906–914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nagakane K, Yoshida Y, Hirata I, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Shirai K et al (2006) Analysis of chemical interaction of 4-MET with hydroxyapatite using XPS. Dent Mater J 25:645–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ (1995) Applying composite luting agent ultrasonically: a successful alternative. J Am Dent Assoc 126:1125–1129

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ, Blunt L, Spence D (1997) Surface integrity of composite inlays following ultrasonic vibration. Am J Dent 10:102–106

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cecilia Goracci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cantoro, A., Goracci, C., Coniglio, I. et al. Influence of ultrasound application on inlays luting with self-adhesive resin cements. Clin Oral Invest 15, 617–623 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0451-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0451-5

Keywords

Navigation