Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2019, vol. 56, nr 3, July-September, p. 239–244

doi: 10.17219/dmp/109233

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

In vitro comparison of shear bond strength of a flowable composite resin and a single-component glass-ionomer to three different pulp-capping agents

Porównanie in vitro wytrzymałości na ścinanie wiązania płynnej żywicy kompozytowej i jednoskładnikowego szkło-jonomeru z trzema materiałami do pokrycia miazgi

Paridokht Zarean1,D,E,F, Reza Roozbeh2,B,C,D, Parichehr Zarean3,D,E,F, Maryam Zare Jahromi4,A,B,D, Parvin Mirzakoochaki Broujeni5,A

1 Dental Implant Research Center, Dental Research Institute, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran

2 Private dental office, Yazd, Iran

3 Dental Research Center, Dental Research Institute, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Iran

4 Department of Endodontics, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Iran

5 Department of Esthetic Dentistry, Dental School, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Iran

Abstract

Background. Various materials are used for vital pulp capping and the bond strength of restorative materials to these pulp-capping agents significantly affects the success rate of vital pulp therapy.
Objectives. The aim of this study was to determine the shear bond strength of a flowable composite resin and a single-component glass-ionomer to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement and BiodentineTM as pulp-capping agents.
Material and Methods. Seventy-two cylindrical acrylic resin blocks, with a central hole 4 mm × 2 mm, were prepared. Mineral trioxide aggregate, CEM cement and Biodentine were placed in the cavities (n = 24 in each group) and incubated for 24 h. The blocks were subdivided into the composite resin and glassionomer subgroups. Cylindrical plastic molds, measuring 3 mm in height and diameter, were used to place the restorative materials on the samples. The shear bond strength test was performed at a strain rate of 1 mm/min in a universal testing machine. The samples were evaluated under a stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification for fracture modes. The data was analyzed with the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests.
Results. The maximum and minimum mean shear bond strength values were recorded in the Biodentinecomposite resin (4.77 MPa) and MTA–glass-ionomer (2.20 MPa) groups, respectively. There were significant differences in the mean shear bond strength values of MTA, CEM cement and Biodentine to the composite resin and glass-ionomer (p < 0.001).
Conclusion. A composite material may be preferable for definitive filling after pulp capping with Biodentine.

Key words

shear bond strength, mineral trioxide aggregate, composite resin, glass-ionomer cement, Biodentine

Słowa kluczowe

wytrzymałość wiązania na ścinanie, agregat trójtlenków mineralnych, żywica kompozytowa, cement szkło-jonomerowy, Biodentyna

References (31)

  1. Ford TR, Torabinejad M, Abedi HR, Bakland LK, Kariyawasam SP. Using mineral trioxide aggregate as a pulp-capping material. J Am Dent Assoc. 1996;127(10):1491–1494.
  2. Mente J, Geletneky B, Ohle M, et al. Mineral trioxide aggregate or calcium hydroxide direct pulp capping: An analysis of the clinical treatment outcome. J Endod. 2010;36(5):806–813.
  3. Didilescu AC, Cristache CM, Andrei M, Voicu G, Perlea P. The effect of dental pulp-capping materials on hard-tissue barrier formation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Dent Assoc. 2018;149(10):903–917.e4.
  4. Parirokh M, Torabinejad M. Mineral trioxide aggregate: A comprehensive literature review. Part I: Chemical, physical, and antibacterial properties. J Endod. 2010;36(1):16–27.
  5. Koubi G, Colon P, Franquin JC, et al. Clinical evaluation of the performance and safety of a new dentine substitute, Biodentine, in the restoration of posterior teeth – a prospective study. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(1):243–249.
  6. Schmidt A, Schäfer E, Dammaschke T. Shear bond strength of lining materials to calcium-silicate cements at different time intervals. J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(2):129–135.
  7. Cantekin K, Avci S. Evaluation of shear bond strength of two resin-based composites and glass ionomer cement to pure tricalcium silicate-based cement (Biodentine®). J Appl Oral Sci. 2014;22(4):302–306.
  8. Asgary S, Shahabi S, Jafarzadeh T, Amini S, Kheirieh S. The properties of a new endodontic material. J Endod. 2008;34(8):990–993.
  9. Malekafzali B, Shekarchi F, Asgary S. Treatment outcomes of pulpotomy in primary molars using two endodontic biomaterials: A 2-year randomised clinical trial. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2011;12(3):189–193.
  10. Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr., Ritter AV, Sturdevant CM. Sturdevant’s Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 6th ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier/Mosby; 2013:245.
  11. Ajami AA, Jafari Navimipour E, Savadi Oskoee S, Abed Kahnamoui M, Lotfi M, Daneshpooy M. Comparison of shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer and composite resin to three pulp capping agents. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2013;7(3):164–168.
  12. Hilton TJ, Ferracane JL, Broome JC, eds. Summitt’s Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach. 4th ed. Hanover Park, IL: Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc.; 2013:516.
  13. Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM, eds. Craig’s Restorative Dental Materials. 13th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier/Mosby; 2012:156–159.
  14. Oskoee SS, Kimyai S, Bahari M, Motahari P, Eghbal MJ, Asgary S. Comparison of shear bond strength of calcium-enriched mixture cement and mineral trioxide aggregate to composite resin. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2011;12(6):457–462.
  15. Doozaneh M, Koohpeima F, Firouzmandi M, Abbassiyan F. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite and resin-modified glass ionomer to two pulp capping materials. Iran Endod J. 2017;12(1):103–107.
  16. Elmi M, Ehsani M, Esmaeili B, Khafri S. Comparison of bond strength of a composite resin with two different adhesive systems and a resin modified glass ionomer to calcium enriched mixture. J Conserv Dent. 2018;21(4):369–372.
  17. Kayahan MB, Nekoofar MH, Kazandağ M, et al. Effect of acid-etching procedure on selected physical properties of mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J. 2009;42(11):1004–1014.
  18. Al-Suleiman M, Baba F, Sawan MN, Suliman A. Mechanical evaluation of the effect of reducing phosphoric acid concentrations and etching duration on the bond strength of orthodontic brackets. J Dent Oral Disord Ther. 2014;2(2):1–5.
  19. Tate WH, Friedl KH, Powers JM. Bond strength of composites to hybrid ionomers. Oper Dent. 1996;21(4):147–152.
  20. Paterson RC. Bacterial contamination and the exposed pulp. Br Dent J. 1976; 140(7):231–236.
  21. Odabaş ME, Bani M, Tirali RE. Shear bond strengths of different adhesive systems to biodentine. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013;2013:626103.
  22. Cengiz E, Ulusoy N. Microshear bond strength of tri-calcium silicate-based cements to different restorative materials. J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(3):231–237.
  23. Bortoluzzi EA, Broon NJ, Bramante CM, Felippe WT, Tanomaru Filho M, Esberard RM. The influence of calcium chloride on the setting time, solubility, disintegration, and pH of mineral trioxide aggregate and white Portland cement with a radiopacifier. J Endod. 2009;35(4):550–554.
  24. Pradelle-Plasse N, Tran XV, Colon P. Physico-chemical properties. In: ORE-FDI working group; Goldberg M, ed. Biocompatibility or Cytotoxic Effects of Dental Composites. Oxford, UK: Coxmoor Publishing Company; 2009:184–194.
  25. Altunsoy M, Tanriver M, Ok E, Kucukyilmaz E. Shear bond strength of a self-adhering flowable composite and a flowable base composite to mineral trioxide aggregate, calcium-enriched mixture cement, and Biodentine. J Endod. 2015;41(10):1691–1695.
  26. Nandini S, Ballal S, Kandaswamy D. Influence of glass-ionomer cement on the interface and setting reaction of mineral trioxide aggregate when used as a furcal repair material using laser Raman spectroscopic analysis. J Endod. 2007;33(2):167–172.
  27. Yesilyurt C, Yildirim T, Taşdemir T, Kusgoz A. Shear bond strength of conventional glass ionomer cements bound to mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod. 2009;35(10):1381–1383.
  28. Mozayeni MA, Milani AS, Marvasti LA, Asgary S. Cytotoxicity of calcium enriched mixture cement compared with mineral trioxide aggregate and intermediate restorative material. Aust Endod J. 2012;38(2):70–75.
  29. Shokouhinejad N, Razmi H, Fekrazad R, et al. Push-out bond strength of two root-end filling materials in root-end cavities prepared by Er,Cr:YSGG laser or ultrasonic technique. Aust Endod J. 2012;38(3):113–117.
  30. Asgary S, Eghbal MJ, Parirokh M, Ghoddusi J, Kheirieh S, Brink F. Comparison of mineral trioxide aggregate’s composition with Portland cements and a new endodontic cement. J Endod. 2009;35(2):243–250.
  31. Armstrong S, Geraldeli S, Maia R, Raposo LH, Soares CJ, Yamagawa J. Adhesion to tooth structure: A critical review of “micro” bond strength test methods. Dent Mater. 2010;26(2):e50–e62.