Shear bond strength of a composite resin to an etched glass ionomer

The shear bond strength of a composite resin bonded to an etched glass ionomer was examined. Results indicate that shear bond strength between the two materials is greater than the cohesive strength of the glass ionomer itself. This property combined with other beneficial properties of glass ionomer materials may lead to their use as bases for composite resin restorations.     

Clinical study on wedge-shape ditch restoration with several restorative materials]

There appeared difficulties in either cavity preparation of restoration retention when wedge-shaped ditch was restored.In order to choose an ideal material and method restored wedge-shaped ditch,we used three kinds of restorative materials (glass ionomer,light curing glass ionomer,light curing composite resin)and four restorative methods (glass ionomer,light curing glass ionomer,light curing composite resin,glass ionomer mixed with light curing composite resin).carried on clinical observation.According to the results of six months follow-up,four methods have no significant differences in abrasion,fracture,shedding and failing incidence(including of abrasion,fracture,and shedding) through statistical test(chi-square test).According to the results of one year follow-up,there were significant differences in abrasion and failing incidence,but fracture and shedding have no significant differences.Results showed that light curing composite resin was better than glass ionomer in wedge-shaped ditch restoration.     

Orthodontic bracket bonding with a plasma-arc light and resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement.

Developments in light-curing technology have led to the introduction of a plasma-arc light-curing unit that delivers high-intensity output for faster curing. The purposes of this study were to determine the shear bond strengths of light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement cured with a plasma-arc light-curing unit and to evaluate the durability of the resultant bond strength with thermal cycling. Comparisons were made between light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and light-cured composite resin. Two light-curing units were used in this study: a plasma-arc light-curing unit and a conventional light-curing unit. The mean shear bond strengths of light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement with the plasma-arc and the conventional light-curing units were 20.3 MPa and 26.0 MPa, respectively. An analysis of variance showed no statistically significant differences between the plasma-arc and the conventional light-curing units. Light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and light-cured composite resin demonstrated similar bond strengths and exhibited no statistical differences. There was no statistical difference in bond strength between the teeth that were thermal cycled and those that were not. Failure sites for the brackets bonded with light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement appeared to be predominantly at the bracket-adhesive interface. The SDs of light-cured composite resin were high for both light-curing units. Whereas the coefficients of variation for light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement ranged from 20% to 30%, those of light-cured composite resin ranged from 40% to 60%. The bond strength of light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement cured with either a conventional light-curing unit or a plasma-arc light-curing unit surpassed the clinically required threshold. The plasma-arc light-curing unit may be an advantageous alternative to the conventional light-curing unit for orthodontic bracket bonding with both light-cured resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement and light-cured composite resin.     

两种材料修复楔状缺损的黏接性能对比研究

目的　比较玻璃离子和光固化复合树脂对牙体的黏接性能。方法　分别采用玻璃离子和光固化复合树脂对 180例75 0个楔状缺损患牙进行修复治疗 ,并于 6个月后复查 ,观察修复材料脱落程度 ,对比两者黏接效果。结果　玻璃离子组修复楔状缺损的总有效率为 92 .0 9% ,光固化复合树脂组为 81.0 1% ,两组相比差异有显著性 (χ2 =33.5 2 5 ,P <0 .0 5 )。结论　玻璃离子对牙体的黏接性能优于光固化复合树脂     

An in vitro study of the bond strength of a glass ionomer cement in the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets

The shear/peel bond strength of a 'no-mix' composite orthodontic bonding resin was compared in vitro with that of a glass ionomer cement. The effect of pre-treatment of the enamel, with either phosphoric acid or polyacrylic acid, prior to using the glass ionomer cement was also assessed. The composite resin had a significantly higher bond strength than the glass ionomer cement. Simple prophylaxis and drying of the enamel achieved the best results when using the glass ionomer cement, whilst etching the tooth surface with phosphoric acid produced a significantly poorer bond to the enamel. Investigation of the site of failure showed the composite resin bonded very well to the tooth and less well to the bracket, whilst the glass ionomer adhered significantly better to the bracket base than to the tooth surface.     

树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂粘结强度的研究

目的 检测树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂的粘结强度,探讨影响粘结性能的相关因素.方法 30颗健康离体前磨牙分成两组,分别用京津釉质粘合剂和树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂初次、二次粘接托槽,测剪切强度及粘结剂残余指数.结果 树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固荆的粘结强度与临床普遍使用的京津釉质粘合剂的粘结强度相近,差异无显著性(P>O.05).结论 树脂加强型玻璃离子粘固剂可以替代复合树脂粘结剂.能够满足临床需要.     

The Class V lesion — Aetiology and restoration*

The aetiology of non-carious cervical lesions is discussed. These have been variously described as ‘abrasion’, ‘erosion’, ‘abrasion/erosion’, and ‘idiopathic cervical’. However, many lesions do not fit the classical appearance or location of an erosive and/or abrasive origin, and there is increasing interest in the possible role of occlusal stress in their aetiology. Non-carious cervical lesions often require restoration, and there are essentially three options using tooth-coloured materials: a restorative glass ionomer cement, a liner/base glass ionomer cement over-layed with a resin composite, or a resin composite bonded by an enamel/dentine-adhesive. The materials and techniques used in these options are discussed, indicating their advantages and disadvantages. Results of available clinical trials of these systems are given, and the link with the stress theory of cervical tooth loss is described. The preferred restorative approaches in order are: resin-modified restorative glass ionomer; resin-modified liner/base glass ionomer with a microfine resin composite overlay; enamel/dentine bonding agent with a micro-fine resin composite.     

三种粘结剂粘结嵌体的微渗漏对比研究

目的：评价复合树脂嵌体及纯钛嵌体采用3种不同粘结剂的微渗漏情况。方法：选择72颗健康上颌前磨牙,随机分为6个实验组,每组12颗。按嵌体备洞要求制备Ⅱ类洞。前三组制作纯钛嵌体,分别用玻璃离子、树脂改良型玻璃离子和树脂粘结剂粘结固位。后三组制作复合树脂嵌体,分别用玻璃离子、树脂改良型玻璃离子和树脂粘结剂粘结固位。结果：同一种材料嵌体用不同粘结剂处理,其微渗漏程度差异有显著性（P〈0.05）;在相同粘结处理不同种嵌体的组间比较,其微渗漏差异P〉0.05。结论：树脂改良型玻璃离子粘结剂与树脂粘结剂抗微渗漏性能优于玻璃离子粘结剂。     

A fluoride-containing composite resin--an in vitro study of a new material for orthodontic bonding

The shear/peel bond strength of a new material, a 'hybrid' of a composite resin and a glass ionomer cement, was compared in vitro with the bond strengths of a composite resin and of a glass ionomer cement. The new material had a significantly greater bond strength than the other materials tested and its properties were very similar to the composite resin. Unlike the glass ionomer cement, etching of the enamel before applying the adhesive is required. The clinical indications for using this new cement are discussed.     

Shear bond strength of chemical and light-cured glass ionomer cements bonded to resin composites

A bond between glass ionomer cements (GIC) and resin composites is desirable for the success of the ‘sandwich’ restoration. Chemically cured glass ionomer cements have been the traditional materials used in this technique since its development, but etching the GIC was necessary to obtain a bond to the composite facing. Producing a very smooth GIC surface has aided in better determining the magnitude of the chemical bond between glass ionomers and resin composites. Shear testing of bonded specimens has revealed that chemical bonding is minimal (0.21 MPa) in conventional glass ionomers, but does exist (4.92 MPa) between GIC and resin composite regardless of the filler content (microfilled vs hybrid) of the composite. Thermal stressing affects the bond to resin-modified glass ionomers, but has no significant effect on self-cured cements. Of all combinations tested, Vitremer/Scotchbond/Silux Plus showed the highest mean shear bond strength. Based on the clinical need for an adhesive bond between GIC liner/base and resin composite, the resin-modified glass ionomer would appear to be the material of choice.     

树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀临床初步应用的研究

目的了解树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀在临床使用的脱落率,探讨树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀在临床使用的可行性.方法20名正畸初诊患者的上颌左右侧分别使用正畸用树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀,复合树脂型正畸釉质粘结剂粘结正畸托槽,观察其临床脱落率.结果树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀粘结托槽的脱落率与临床普遍使用的复合树脂型正畸釉质粘结剂粘结托槽的脱落率相似.结论树脂加强型玻璃离子水门汀可以满足临床需要.     

Fluoride release from orthodontic adhesives

Two commercial orthodontic adhesives containing fluoride were evaluated in vitro for fluoride release. Fluoride release is critical in preventing both decalcification around orthodontic brackets and the formation of white spot lesions. A paste-type adhesive composite resin and a glass ionomer luting agent were compared to a glass ionomer restorative material to determine fluoride release. The composite resin adhesive released minimal fluoride for only three days and then ceased. The glass ionomer adhesive released fluoride at a similar rate to the glass ionomer restorative material with fluoride release still evident at three months.     

Demineralization around orthodontic brackets bonded with resin-modified glass ionomer cement and fluoride-releasing resin composite.

PURPOSE: Enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets is one of the risks associated with orthodontic treatment. Glass ionomer cements have been shown to decrease enamel demineralization adjacent to brackets and bands but do not exhibit bond strengths comparable to resin composites. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare a fluoride-releasing resin composite versus a resin-modified glass ionomer cement for inhibition of enamel demineralization surrounding orthodontic brackets. METHODS: Forty-five teeth were randomly assigned to 3 groups of 15 teeth. Fifteen were bonded with Concise (3M), a non-fluoride-releasing resin composite (control); 15 teeth were bonded with Light Bond (Reliance), a fluoride-releasing resin composite; and 15 teeth were bonded with Fuji Ortho LC (GC Corporation), a resin-modified glass ionomer cement. The teeth were placed in an artificial caries solution to create lesions. Following sectioning of the teeth in a buccolingual direction, polarized light microscopy was utilized to evaluate enamel demineralization adjacent to the orthodontic bracket. The area of the lesion was measured 100 microns from the orthodontic bracket and bonding agent. RESULTS: MANOVA (P < .0001) and Duncan's test (P < .05) indicated the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Ortho LC) and the fluoride-releasing resin composite (Light Bond) had significantly less adjacent enamel demineralization than the non-fluoride-releasing resin composite control. However, there was no significant difference between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement and the fluoride-releasing resin composite. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this in vitro study, it can be concluded that Fuji Ortho LC and Light Bond exhibit significant inhibition of adjacent demineralization compared to the non-fluoride-releasing control.     

树脂化玻璃离子充填材料治疗老年根面龋临床疗效观察

目的：比较光固化复合树脂、玻璃离子水门汀和树脂化玻璃离子3种填充材料的临束效果。方法：对65岁以上270例老年人435颗牙随机分为三组，分别接受3种填充材料治疗，随访1～2年。结果：观察1年，光固化复合树脂、玻璃离子水门汀和树脂化玻璃离子充填的总有效率分别为75．00％、87．84％、94．84％；2年的总有效率分别为71．30％、80．70％、92．00％，统计学分析1年和2年的有效率，树脂化玻璃离子组优于玻璃离子水门汀组、玻璃离子水门汀组优于光固化复合树脂组，差异有显著性（P〈0．05）；树脂化玻璃离子组优于光固化复合树脂组，差异有显著性（P〈0．01）。结论：树脂化玻璃离子较光固化复合树脂和玻璃离子水门汀修复老年根面龋疗效好。     

Demineralization resistance and tensile bond strength of four luting agents after acid attack

Resistance to acid demineralization provided by luting agents adjacent to enamel was evaluated for four different luting agents: composite resin, glass ionomer, polycarboxylate, and zinc phosphate cement. Cement solubility and enamel demineralization after acid attack at pH 3.0 were measured radiographically and calculated using computer-aided design. Tensile bond strength of a miniature crown seated on an accurately prepared preparation was evaluated after acid attack using an Instron instrument. Crown retention after 12 days was greater for the polycarboxylate (2,000 kg/m2) than the zinc phosphate cement (500 kg/m2). Crown retention for the glass ionomer (1,100 kg/m2) and composite resin luting agent (1,400 kg/m2) were similar statistically after 21 days of acid exposure. Cement washouts for zinc phosphate and polycarboxylate were similar, and were greater than either glass ionomer or composite resin luting agent. The amount of demineralization related to cements was, from greatest to least: zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate, composite resin, glass ionomer. Fluoride release was concluded to be initially effective in reducing enamel solubility in spite of cement solubility.     

Increasing the resistance of teeth to fracture: bonded composite resin versus glass ionomer cement

The purpose of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of teeth restored with bonded composite resin to teeth restored with glass ionomer cement. Extracted maxillary premolars prepared with MOD slots were restored with either a light-cured composite resin (P-30) bonded (with Scotchbond) to enamel and dentin or with glass ionomer cement (Ketac Fil) following manufacturers' directions. One group, left unrestored, served as the control. All of the teeth were loaded occlusally by a universal testing machine until fracture. The results suggest that teeth restored with bonded composite resin are significantly more resistant to fracture than teeth restored with glass ionomer cement (P=0.05). cohesive failures occurred frequently within the bulk of the glass ionomer cement. Failures with the bonded composites usually occurred within the bonding agent.     

An in vitro investigation of marginal dentine caries abutting composite resin and glass ionomer cement restorations

BACKGROUND: There are a number of studies citing the primary reason for replacing auto cure glass ionomer cements was due to recurrent caries. The purpose of this study was to use an in vitro model to measure caries at the dentine restoration interface of bonded composite resin and auto cure glass ionomer cement restorations and to measure the amount of surface degradation occurring in the restorative materials. METHODS: Specimens of auto cure glass ionomer cements (Riva Fast, Fuji IX Fast, Ketac Molar Quick and Fuji VII) and bonded composite resin restorations (Ice, SDI) were placed separately at the dentino-enamel junction of 10 recently extracted human third molar teeth, disinfected and placed into the overflow from a continuous culture of S. mutans for two weeks. Restorations were sectioned and prepared for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and electron probe microanalysis (EPMA). Restoration tooth interfaces were photographed and the distance from the surface of the teeth to the surface of the restorations measured. EPMA of percentage weights of calcium, phosphorous and fluoride were made outwards from the restoration surface 130pm at a depth of 10 microm below the surface of the dentine. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the surface heights of composite resin, auto cure glass ionomer cements compared to teeth surfaces. Percentage weights of calcium and phosphorus levels were similar to non-demineralized dentine in the auto cure glass ionomer cement samples but there were significant reductions in mineral content of dentine adjacent to bonded composite resin restorations. Fluoride levels were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that placing a bonded composite resin restoration into dentine affords little protection to the surrounding tooth from caries attack although insignificant degradation of the restorative surface occurs. Placing a glass ionomer cement restoration into dentine protects the surrounding tooth from caries but degradation of the restoration surface occurs.     

Pulpal response to a hybrid composite resin inlay bonded with a newly developed resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement

This study evaluated the pulpal response of hybrid composite resin inlay luted with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and compared it with a glass ionomer cement and an amalgam. Cervical cavities were prepared in monkey teeth. A resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement (Ionotite F, Tokuyama Dental Corp.) was applied to the teeth in one of the experimental groups, and then hybrid composite resin inlays (Estenia, Kuraray Medical Inc.) were bonded to the cavities. The teeth were extracted after 3, 30, and 90 days and stained with Hematoxylin and Eosin staining or Brown and Brenn gram stain for bacterial observation. No serious inflammatory reaction of the pulp, such as necrosis or abscess formation, was observed in any of the experimental groups. No bacterial penetration along the cavity walls was detected in the resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement group. Hence, the resin-modified glass ionomer luting cement showed an acceptable biological compatibility with monkey pulp.     

Dental fracture fragment attachment: fracture model and luting agent comparisons

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was twofold: 1. To compare two different research models for simulating a traumatic anterior tooth fracture: the blunt trauma method (standard method) and an AL2O3 sectioning method (experimental method). 2. To compare the bond strength of tooth fragments bonded with resin modified glass ionomer vs. a light cured composite resin. METHODS: Two hundred bovine incisors were used in the study and kept in plain tap water throughout. The study consisted of five basic steps: 1. Fracture of the teeth by either blunt trauma (chisel and hammer) or AL2O3 sectioning disc. 2. Luting of the fractured fragments back to the teeth using either a composite resin or resin modified glass ionomer. 3. Thermocycling of the repaired teeth. 4. Dislodging the teeth to determine the strength of repair. 5. Determination of fracture type. RESULTS: One-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference in the forces required to fracture the resin modified glass ionomer and composite resin regardless of whether the teeth were originally fractured with the blunt force method (p=0.030) or the disc sectioning method (p=.001). One-way ANOVA also revealed a statistically significant difference between the forces required for fracture by blunt trauma and the disc fracture techniques with the resin modified glass ionomer group (p=0.000345). However, there was no significant difference when the two techniques were compared for the composite resin (p= 0.2941). CONCLUSIONS: 1. The resin modified glass ionomer was significantly stronger than the composite resin when both the blunt trauma and the disc fracture techniques were employed. 2. The study's results do not support substituting the ease of the AL2O3 disc for the more time-consuming blunt trauma method.     

不同充填材料治疗老年人根面龋的临床观察

目的 探讨治疗老年人根面龋的理想充填材料.方法 328 颗患牙随机分为三组,分别用富士 9 玻璃离子、银粉玻璃离子和光固化复合树脂充填修复.随访12～18个月.结果 富士9 玻璃离子修复成功率为90.91%,高于光固化复合树脂组(76.29%,P<0.05),与银粉玻璃离子组(89.09%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).富士 9 玻璃离子充填老年人根面龋者,无一例继发龋及微渗漏发生.结论 在老年人根面龋的治疗中,富士 9 玻璃离子和银粉玻璃离子疗效优于光固化复合树脂.富士 9 玻璃离子临床操作更具有便利性,为老年人根面龋较理想的充填材料.