The effect of subject age on the microtensile bond strengths of a resin and a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive to tooth structure

In this study, the microtensile bond strengths of an etch-and-rinse resin adhesive to dentin and enamel and a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive to dentin were determined on teeth known to have originated from subjects over 60 years of age. The same tests were repeated on teeth originating from young subjects. The resin adhesive was Prime & Bond NT (Caulk/Dentsply), while the resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive was Fuji Bond LC (GC America). Both were paired with the same hybrid resin composite, TPH3 (Caulk/Dentsply). Testing was performed after 48 hours using a "non-trimming" microtensile test at a crosshead speed of 0.6 mm/minute. No significant differences were observed between the young and aged teeth for any comparison (p > 0.05). SEM evaluation of the etched dentinal surfaces demonstrated less depth of decalcification in the intertubular areas of aged dentin, but there was no observable difference within the tubules of young and aged dentin.     

Sealing effectiveness of light-cured glass ionomer cement liners

Glass ionomer materials have been used as liners or bases beneath restorations, but light-cured varieties have recently been introduced. Microleakage at the restoration/tooth interface in cervical cavities was used to test the adhesion to dentin of two new light-cured glass ionomer cement lining materials, XR-Ionomer and Fuji Lining LC. Wedge-shaped cervical cavities were prepared on extracted teeth with a gingival cavosurface margin involving dentin, and the specimens were assigned randomly to three groups. The experimental groups were restored with two light-cured glass ionomer cements, the controls were restored with a chemically cured glass ionomer cement; and marginal leakage was assessed by dye penetration. The two light-cured glass ionomer cements displayed some adhesion to dentin in class V test cavities, but there was no significant difference between the two materials.     

3种黏接剂的微渗漏比较

目的采用冷热循环后染色的方法,比较贵金属、树脂两种不同嵌体材料使用树脂黏接剂、玻璃离子水门汀、磷酸锌水门汀3种不同黏接材料的微渗漏。方法在前磨牙上分别制作贵金属、树脂嵌体各30件;分别用3种不同黏接材料与相应牙体窝洞黏固。将所有试件冷热循环后品红染色,沿嵌体长轴剖开,观测染料渗漏的情况。并测量修复体和牙体边缘的距离。结果各嵌体组都发生了明显的微渗漏。每组的染色都达到了窝洞底并且累及牙本质,龈缘的染色比牙合面深,而树脂黏接剂相对玻璃离子水门汀和磷酸锌水门汀染色浅。结论3种黏接剂经过4000次冷热循环以后边缘都发生了渗漏。染色显示渗漏发生在龈缘的量比牙合面的量大,而其与边缘的宽度未显示明显的关联。     

Shear bond strength and interface analysis between a resin composite and a recent high-viscous glass ionomer cement bonded with various adhesive systems

Objective

This study investigated the shear bond strength (SBS) and interface between a resin composite and a new high-viscous glass ionomer cement (HV-GIC), a HV-GIC, a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC), a bulk-fill flowable composite, and a regular flowable composite bonded with various adhesive systems.

Methods and materials

A resin composite (Filtek Z350) was bonded to a new HV-GIC (EQUIA Forte Fil) using various adhesive systems, including a universal adhesive in self-etch and etch-and-rinse mode (Scotchbond Universal), a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Scotchbond 1-XT), a one-step self-etch adhesive (Optibond All-in-one) tested also after silane application (Monobond Plus), and a coating material (EQUIA Forte Coat). The resin composite was also bonded to a HV-GIC (Fuji IX GP), a RM-GIC (Fuji II LC), a bulk-fill flowable composite (SDR), and a regular flowable composite (Tetric Evo Flow) with the universal adhesive in self-etch mode (Scotchbond Universal). Two-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s post hoc test was used to investigate the difference in SBS. Failures were analyzed by chi-square test. Bonding interfaces were examined by environmental scanning electron microscopy (E-SEM).

Results

SBS to EQUIA Forte Fil was significantly lower with Scotchbond 1-XT than with all other adhesive systems. By using Scotchbond Universal with the self-etch technique, the SBS to EQUIA Forte Fil was significantly higher than the SBS to Fuji IX GP and significantly lower than the SBS to Fuji II LC, SDR, and Tetric Evo Flow. E-SEM images showed an intimate contact at all interfaces examined.

Conclusion

EQUIA Forte Fil showed satisfactory SBS and interfaces with all adhesives tested.

Clinical relevance

Bonding between the resin composite and HV-GIC can be achieved using a universal adhesive in self-etch mode, an easy-to-use adhesive system.

     

The marginal seal of Class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow) versus an injectable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) on microleakage at the cavosurface margin of the proximal box of Class II restorations in permanent teeth in-vitro. Thirty caries and restoration-free human bicuspids were prepared with mesial and distal slot preparations and were filled either with a bonding agent (Optibond) plus a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow), Group I; bonding agent (Optibond) plus a flowable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC), Group II; or a flowable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) with no bonding agent, Group III. All specimens were then immersed in a 2% solution of basic fuschin dye for 24 hours to allow for dye penetration into possible existing gaps. These teeth were then carefully sectioned mesially/distally into two pieces using an Isomet saw. The teeth were then studied under a binocular microscope to measure depths of dye penetrations as an indication of marginal microleakage at the gingival cavosurface margin and scored as follows: 0 = no dye penetration, 1 = dye penetration into enamel only, 2 = dye penetration into enamel and dentin, 3 = dye penetration into the pulp. The specimens were also evaluated using a SEM. The results showed that there were statistically significant differences between Groups I (Tetric Flow) and (Fuji II LC plus bonding agent), II in favor of Group I; between Groups I and (Fuji II LC with no bonding agent), III in favor of Group I; as well as Groups II and III in favor of Group II (Fuji II LC plus bonding agent). Group I (bonding agent plus flowable composite resin) showed significantly less microleakage. Group II (bonding agent plus flowable glass ionomer) demonstrated a bond that existed between the bonding agent and the glass ionomer but microleakage within microgaps of the glass ionomer itself Group III (flowable glass ionomer plus no bonding agent) demonstrated significant microleakage between the glass ionomer and tooth structure, microgaps within the glass ionomer, and lack of retention of the restoration. It appears that the use of a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow) plus a bonding agent (Optibond) in the proximal box of a Class II restoration in permanent teeth will significantly reduce the microleakage at the cavosurface margin when compared with an injectable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) with or without a bonding agent (Optibond).     

Penetration of radiocalcium at the margins of resin and glass ionomer dentine bonding agents in primary and permanent teeth

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the leakage of three resin dentine bonding agents (Prime and Bond, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, Probond) and a glass ionomer dentine bonding agent (GC Fujibond LC), in cervical cavities prepared in primary and permanent molar teeth restored with a hybrid composite resin (Tetric). METHODS: Cervical cavities without a bevel at the cavo-surface margins were prepared in the buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted primary and permanent molar teeth. After being restored, the teeth were stored for 1 week in a saline solution at 37 degrees C and then thermally cycled between 5 and 55 degrees C. Marginal leakage was determined subsequently using a radioactive isotope containing 45Ca and an autoradiographic technique. RESULTS: The results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in microleakage of the bond between permanent and primary teeth dentine and Fuji Bond LC and Probond dentine bonding agents. The difference between permanent and primary teeth groups for gingival values of the Prime and Bond 2.1 group U=22.5, p=0.0355 and the Scotchbond Multipurpose group U=24.0, p=0.0406 were statistically significant. There were no significant differences between the occlusal and gingival microleakage values in either primary or permanent teeth with Prime and Bond 2.1, Fuji Bond LC and Probond except the difference at Scotchbond Multipurpose in primary teeth. For primary teeth gingival margins, none of the bonding systems were significantly different from the control group. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that although no statistically significant differences were found between test and control group values, the use of Fuji II LC in cervical cavities with cementum margins in primary teeth would provide the best resistance to microleakage among the test materials while the use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose would provide the best resistance to microleakage in cervical cavities with cementum margins in permanent teeth.     

Effect of various surface protections on the margin microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer cements

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Because conventional glass ionomer cements are moisture sensitive, a surface coating is recommended during the initial setting stage. It is unknown whether resin-modified glass ionomer cements also need surface protection. PURPOSE: This study investigated the effect of various surface protections on microleakage with Class V resin-modified glass ionomer restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty extracted molars with buccal and lingual Class V cavity preparations were restored with a resin-modified glass ionomer (Fuji II LC). The occlusal margin of each restoration was on enamel and the cervical margin on dentin. After immediate finishing and polishing, the teeth were divided into 4 groups according to the following surface protection treatments: group I, unprotected; group II, Fuji varnish; group III, resin adhesive; and group IV, acid etching and resin adhesive. After these procedures, all teeth were stored in isotonic saline for 24 hours, thermocycled 1500 times at 5 degrees C to 60 degrees C, and soaked in dye solution for 24 hours. The teeth then were longitudinally sectioned and observed under a stereomicroscope. The degree of dye penetration was recorded and analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests (P<.05) RESULTS: None of the 4 groups demonstrated complete margin sealing at either the occlusal or cervical margins. Groups II and III displayed the least microleakage at cervical margins; a significant difference existed between groups I and III (P=.034). Compared with the other 3 groups, group IV showed significantly greater microleakage at the cervical margins. CONCLUSION: Although resin-modified glass ionomers can be finished immediately, they remain moisture sensitive. Within the limitations of this study, the results suggest that resin adhesive should be used as a surface protection to reduce margin microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer restorations.     

Effect of flexural load cycling on microleakage of extended root caries restorations

This study evaluated the microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer, flowable compomer and flowable resin composite restorations on a Class V cavity of simulated advanced root caries under a flexural load cycling condition. Thirty-six non-carious human maxillary premolars were mounted in cylindrical acrylic resin molds. The cavities were prepared in the proximal root surface, from the middle of the buccal surface to the middle of the lingual surface, approximately 1 mm below the cemento-enamel junction, 2 mm axial width and 1.2 mm in depth. The teeth were randomly assigned to one of three groups with 12 teeth in each group: Group 1: Cavity conditioner and Fuji II LC (GC America), Group 2: Prime & Bond NT and Dyract Flow (Caulk-Dentsply), Group 3: Excite and Tetric flow (Ivoclar/Vivadent). Specimens were settled laterally on a fatigue-testing machine that was adjusted to deliver a force of 60N. The specimens were load cycled at 1 Hz for 5000 cycles, placed in a staining solution and sectioned to evaluate microleakage penetration. Results indicate that the coronal and gingival margins showed significant microleakage differences among the three restorations (p<0.05). At the coronal margin, there was no significant difference between Groups 2 and 3. At the gingival margin, there was no significant difference between Groups 1 and 2. It was concluded that the marginal sealing ability of a flowable resin composite under a flexural cycling load was better than in other selected materials and that flowable resin composite with dentin adhesive was a desirable alternative for root caries restorations extended to the proximal surface.     

Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Resin-modified glass ionomers and polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers) have been introduced to provide esthetic restorations. However, there is concern about the marginal sealing ability of these materials, especially at the dentin (cementum) aspects of restorations. PURPOSE: This in vitro study evaluated the microleakage of Class V restorations made with resin-modified glass ionomers or a compomer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty noncarious human molar teeth were used. Standardized kidney-shaped Class V cavity preparations were placed in the buccal and lingual surfaces at the cementoenamel junction. Teeth were randomly assigned to 3 experimental groups of 10 teeth each and restored as follows: group 1, Fuji II LC; group 2, Vitremer; and group 3, Dyract. In all cases, the manufacturers' instructions were strictly followed. All materials were placed in a single increment. Unfinished restorations were immediately coated with the respective manufacturers' sealer or varnish and this was either light cured for 20 seconds or allowed to air-dry. After 24 hours, teeth were finished to contour and to the cavosurface margins, coated with nail varnish except for 1 mm around the restoration margin, thermocycled (1000x, 5-55 degrees C) and placed in a solution of 2% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours at room temperature. The staining along the tooth restoration interface was recorded. RESULTS: Kruskal-Wallis 1-way analysis of variance revealed significant differences among all restorative materials for the overall, occlusal, and gingival scores (P =.03, P =.01, P =.01, respectively). Occlusal and gingival scores for each matched pair of restorative materials using the Wilcoxon test showed statistically significant differences between Fuji II LC glass ionomer cement and Dyract composite, both for the occlusal (P =.005) and gingival (P =.005) margins and also as an overall evaluation (P =.01), with Fuji II LC showing the least dye penetration. Vitremer revealed dye penetration scores not significantly different from Fuji II LC glass ionomer cement or Dyract composite. CONCLUSION: Resin-modified glass ionomers showed less or similar microleakage than the polyacid-modified composite resin tested.     

Bond strength of restorative materials to human dentin: influence of post-extraction time

This study was undertaken to determine if the time after which teeth are extracted influences the tensile bond strength of a glass ionomer (Fuji II: GC) and a dentin bonding agent (Scotchbond Self Cure; 3M) to dentin. Within 20 min of extraction, 14 teeth were bonded with glass ionomer and 13 teeth with Scotchbond Self Cure plus a composite material (Clearfil; Kuraray), by attachment of orthodontic brackets to prepared dentin surfaces. The bonds were fractured in tension, and yielded values of 3.7 MPa for glass ionomer and 1.08 MPa for Scotchbond Self Cure + Clearfil. These data were significantly different (P less than 0.002) from data previously obtained from the use of old teeth, from which values of 2.20 MPa and 1.82 MPa for glass ionomer and Clearfil + Scotchbond Self Cure, respectively, were obtained. It was concluded that the time after extraction can significantly change bond strengths to dentin, but that the direction and magnitude of these changes depend on the adhesive system used.     

Effect of adhesive systems associated with resin-modified glass ionomer cements

The bonding of resin-modified glass ionomer cements to dentin remains a challenge in clinical routine. In an attempt to improve this property, different materials and techniques have been proposed. This study investigated the shear bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cements (Vitremer, 3M/ESPE and Fuji II LC Improved, GC) to human dentin using two one-bottle adhesive systems (Prime & Bond 2.1, Dentsply and Single Bond, 3M/ESPE). The restored specimens were stored in deionized water for 24 h at 37 +/- 1 degrees C, and then the bonded surfaces were tested in shear strength using a Universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm min(-1). Bond strength means were recorded and failure modes were assessed with a stereomicroscope at 40x magnification. Data were submitted to two-way anova and multiple comparisons were performed using a Tukey statistical test (P < 0.05). Fuji II LC Improved yielded higher bond strength (P < 0.05) than Vitremer in all experimental conditions. No statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed among the proposed dentin surface treatments, although a slight decrease in bond strength was observed when phosphoric acid was used alone. Bond strengths of the resin-modified glass ionomer cements to dentin seemed to be more material-dependent than surface treatment-dependent. It may be concluded that the one-bottle adhesive systems tested in this study did not improve the bond strength of the resin-modified glass ionomer cements to dentin.     

Microtensile bond strength of tooth-colored materials to primary tooth dentin

PURPOSE: This study measured the microtensile bond strengths of 2 tooth-colored restorative materials with and without conditioning of primary teeth dentin, and examined the micromorphology of the debonded surfaces and material-dentin interfaces. METHODS: Cylindrical specimens of packable composite resin (PCR) and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) bonded to dentin of primary teeth were ground to an hourglass shape and tested for microtensile bond strength. The debonded surfaces and material-dentin interfaces were prepared and examined under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). RESULTS: The microtensile bond strength values (mean +/- SD, in MPa) of PCR (Filtek P60 with Single Bond) and RMGIC (Fuji II LC), with or without the application of Cavity Conditioner (14.8 +/- 5.36, 12.01 +/- 4.43, 11.94 +/- 4.60, respectively), did not differ significantly (P > .05). Partial adhesive and partial cohesive failures within the restorative material predominated. The distributions of failure modes did not differ significantly between groups (P > .05). Under SEM, each material was seen to be closely adapted to dentin. Dentinal tubules were enlarged with etching, and the depth of penetration of resin tags of PCR was greater than for RMGIC. Smear plugs were incompletely removed by cavity conditioning. CONCLUSIONS: The bond strength of the PCR, Filtek P60 with Single Bond, to dentin of primary teeth was comparable to that of the RMGIC, Fuji II LC. Conditioning of the cavity preparation with Cavity Conditioner did not improve the bond strength of Fuji II LC. The distribution of failure modes did not differ between materials.     

Effects of the XR-bonding system on in vitro caries

This study evaluated the effects of a dentin bonding system and glass ionomer liner on in vitro recurrent caries around resin composite restorations in dentin. The dentin adhesive significantly reduced the size of recurrent lesions. The glass ionomer liner, applied either to the axial wall or to the cavosurface margin, provided an even greater cariostatic effect. Both the adhesive and the liner reduced the size of cavity wall lesions. In addition, zones of caries inhibition were present around 75% of restorations lined with glass ionomer cement.     

Demineralization inhibition of direct tooth-colored restorative materials

This study compared the demineralization inhibition properties of fluoride releasing tooth-colored restorative materials. Materials evaluated included a giomer (Reactmer, Shofu [RM]), a conventional glass ionomer (Fuji II, GC [FJ]), a resin modified glass ionomer (Fuji II LC, GC [FL]) and a compomer (Dyract AP, Dentsply [DY]). A non-fluoride releasing composite (Spectrum TPH, Dentsply [SP]) was used for comparison. Class V preparations on buccal and palatal/lingual were made at the CEJ of 75 freshly extracted molars. The teeth were randomly divided into five groups of 15 and restored with the various materials. The occlusal half of each restoration was in enamel, while the gingival half was in dentin. The restored teeth were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for two weeks and subjected to artificial caries challenge (18 hours demineralization [pH 5.0] followed by six hours of remineralization [pH 7.0]) for three days. Sections of 130 +/- 20 microm were examined with a polarized light microscope, and outer lesion depth [OLD] and wall area [WA] lesion/inhibition measurements were made using image analysis software. All data were subjected to statistical analyses at 0.05 significance level. For the various materials, OLD ranged from 54.55 to 65.86 microm and 124.68 to 145.97 microm in enamel and dentin, respectively. WA ranged from -2356.13 to 1398.20 microm2 and -3011.73 to 5095.80 microm2 (positive values indicate wall inhibition, negative values indicate wall lesion) in enamel and dentin, respectively. Results of ANOVA/Scheffe's post-hoc test (p<0.05) were as follows: Enamel OLD--no significant difference between materials; Dentin OLD--SP > FJ, FL & RM; Enamel WA inhibition--FJ, FL & RM > DY & SP and Dentin WA inhibition--FJ > FL > RM > DY > SP. The demineralization inhibition effect of giomers, conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements appear to be more evident at the margins of restorations.     

Nd:YAG激光对不同充填材料牙本质边缘微渗漏的影响

目的 评价Nd:YAG激光对不同充填材料与牙本质之间边缘微渗漏的影响。方法 选用人离体前磨牙36颗,制备V类洞,随机分为激光组和对照组,激光组使用80 rnJ、10 Hz脉冲Nd:YAG激光照射后,分别用全酸蚀粘接树脂、自酸蚀粘接树脂和玻璃离子充填洞型,对照组不使用激光,同样用如前所述的3种材料充填洞型。将所有标本浸泡在2%亚甲基蓝溶液中24 h后,用金刚砂片从颊舌向通过充填物中央纵向切开牙体,显微镜下观察龈壁染料渗透的深度。采用SAS8.0软件对数据进行统计学处理。结果 经Nd:YAG激光照射后尽管3种材料与牙本质之间微渗漏程度均有降低趋势,但只有玻璃离子组激光照射后较未照射组微渗漏降低具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 脉冲Nd:YAG激光照射牙本质壁,在一定程度上可能会减少玻璃离子充填材料与洞壁的微渗漏。     

Postoperative dental bleaching: effect of microleakage on Class V tooth colored restorative materials

The effect of 3 percent, 11 percent, and 16 percent carbamide peroxide bleaching solutions and 35 percent hydrogen peroxide bleaching gel on microleakage of Class V composite resins, resin modified glass ionomer cements, and compomer restorative materials together with corresponding (if indicated) fourth/fifth generation bonding agents was evaluated using previously extracted human teeth. Five groups of Class V cavity preparations were placed in enamel of the facial surfaces of 200 teeth. Groups A through D included 40 restorations each (4 different restorative materials and their accompanying bonding agent multiplied by 10 teeth) treated with 3 percent, 11 percent, and 16 percent carbamide peroxide bleach and 35 percent hydrogen peroxide bleach. Group E included 40 restorations without treatment of bleach and stood as the control. The restorative materials included were: Fuji II LC resin modified glass ionomer cement, Helioprogress composite resin/-Heliobond adhesive system, Aelitefil composite resin/Allbond 2 adhesive and Dyract compomer material/Prime & Bond adhesive system. Bleaching agents included were Rembrandt 3 percent peroxide gel, Perfecta 16 percent carbamide peroxide gel, White & Brite 11 percent carbamide peroxide solution and Superoxyl 35 percent hydrogen peroxide gel. All teeth were thermally stressed for 100 cycles and microleakage were assessed by dye penetration. The results were tabulated using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) testing procedures. The Aelitefil composite resin material behaved the least favorably (relative to microleakage) compared to the other materials when exposed to various concentrations of dental bleaching agents.     

Effect of fluorosis on shear bond strength of glass ionomer-based restorative materials to dentin

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Several studies have investigated the adhesion of glass ionomer-based restorative materials to nonfluorotic teeth, but there appears to be no information on the bond strength of these restorative materials to dentin in fluorotic teeth. PURPOSE: This study investigated the effect of dental fluorosis on the bond strength of Ketac-fil conventional glass ionomer cement, Vitremer resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and Dyract polyacid modified resin to dentin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety posterior teeth were classified according to the severity of fluorosis, by using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov index, TFI. The teeth were divided into 3 equal groups (TFI = 0,TFI = 1-3, TFI = 4+) of 30 teeth, which were again divided into 3 equal subgroups for testing each of the3 restorative materials. Occlusal surfaces of mounted teeth were ground flat to expose dentin. Cylindrical specimens (4 mm diameter and 4 mm high) of the restorative materials were bonded to the middle of the cleaned exposed dentin surfaces, according to the manufacturers' instructions. After storing the specimens in 100% humidity at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, shear bond strengths of the restorative materials were measured with an Instron testing machine at crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. RESULTS: Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey-B test revealed that Dyract had significantly higher shear bond strength to dentin than Ketac-fil or Vitremer cements, regardless of severity of fluorosis (P <.05). Furthermore, there was an inverse relationship between shear bond strength and the severity of fluorosis for each of the restorative materials. Cohesive mode of failure was most prevalent in nonfluorotic teeth (TFI = 0), especially with Ketac-fil cement, whereas Dyract cement had the greatest propensity for adhesive failure. CONCLUSION: Fluorosis reduces the shear bond strength of glass ionomer-based restorative materials to dentin.     

A comparison of the shear bond strengths of two glass ionomer cements

The objective of this study was to determine the in vitro shear bond strength (in megapascals) and location of bond failure with two light-cured glass ionomer resin systems. One system was a hybrid glass ionomer cement with resin (GC Orthodontics, Aslip, Ill), and the other system a glass-filled resin system (Reliance Orthodontic Products, Inc, Itasca, Ill). These systems, Fuji Ortho LC (GC Orthodontics) and Ultra Band Lok^{^} (Reliance), respectively, were compared to a light-cured composite resin. Maxillary premolar brackets (n = 200) were bonded to the facial surface of human premolar teeth. The two glass ionomer resin systems were each evaluated by two protocols, one according to the manufacturers’ direction plus a variation of their respective technique. The five distinct groups (n = 40) were stored in 37°C distilled water for 30 days and subjected to thermocycling before shear bond strength testing. The findings indicated that large variations existed between the bond strengths of the materials tested. The laboratory shear bond strength of the glass-filled resin glass ionomer cement (Reliance), whether tested in a dry or moist field, was similar to the composite control with all of the previous materials being significantly (P < .01) higher than both the hybrid glass ionomer cement groups (Fuji Ortho LC). However, the hybrid glass ionomer cement with enamel conditioner demonstrated a clinically acceptable mean megapascal value. The Adhesive Remnant Index values ranged from 0.53 to 1.62. The hybrid glass ionomer cement without enamel conditioning recorded the lowest mean adhesive remnant index score and the lowest mean megapascal score. Although both products are glass ionomer resin systems, their individual chemistries vary; this affects their clinical performance. Clinically, it may be suggested that glass ionomers used in a dry field may be beneficial for orthodontic bonding, and that glass ionomer resin systems used in a moist environment need an enamel conditioner. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;115:125-32.)     

Antibacterial activity of resin adhesives, glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer in contact with dentin caries samples

A total of 103 clinical samples of carious dentin were used to study the antibacterial action of different dental resin adhesive materials (Gluma 2000, Syntac, Prisma Universal Bond 3, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose and Prime&Bond 2.0) glass ionomer cements (Ketac-Cem, Ketac-Bond, Ketac-Silver, Ketac-Fil) resin-modified glass ionomer cements (Fuji II LC, Vitremer and Vitrebond) and a compomer (Dyract). The agar plate diffusion method was used for the microbial cultures and a chlorhexidine control. The growth of the caries-producing microorganisms was effectively inhibited by the Vitremer and Vitrebond cements, and to a lesser extent by the Scotchbond Multi-Purpose adhesive system. Overall, there were statistically significant differences in the antibacterial activity of the products tested.     

Marginal leakage of visible light-cured glass ionomer restorative materials

This study examined the sealing of two visible light-cured glass ionomer restorative materials and a conventional glass ionomer. Class V cavity preparations were completed at the cementoenamel junction on the facial and lingual surfaces of extracted human molars. The cavity preparations were restored with either VariGlass VLC, GC Fuji II LC, or GC Fuji II glass ionomer cements. The restored teeth were thermocycled, immersed in fuchsin dye for 24 hours, sectioned, and evaluated with a measuring microscope. No microleakage occurred at the enamel/glass ionomer or dentin/glass ionomer cement interfaces of any samples, but the enamel adjacent to the VariGlass glass ionomer cement restorations exhibited crazing and staining.