A comparative study of retentive strengths of zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate and glass ionomer cements with stainless steel crowns--an in vitro study

This study was conducted on 30 extracted human primary molars to assess the retentive strengths of zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate and glass ionomer cements. The teeth were embedded in resin blocks and were randomly divided into 3 groups of 10 each. The occlusal surfaces of all teeth were reduced uniformly by 1.0 to 1.5 mm. All mesial, distal undercuts were removed and sharp angles rounded. This was followed by cementing pretrimmed and precontoured stainless steel crowns on each tooth with hand pressure and storing in artificial saliva at 37 degrees C for 24 hours. Retentive strength was tested using Instron Universal Testing Machine. The load was applied starting from a zero reading and gradually increased until the cemented stainless steel crowns showed signs of movement and then the readings were recorded. It was found that retentive strengths of zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cements were statistically better (P < 0.05) when compared to the polycarboxylate cement. Negligible difference (0. 59 kg/cm2) was however observed between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cements.     

Changes in retention strength of luting cements by repeated loading

The retention of crowns cemented on abutment tooth model was examined for three types of luting cements when compressive loads of 2.5 to 10.0 kg were repeatedly applied to the occlusal plane. The chamfer type Ni-Cr alloy crown and abutment tooth model were prepared, and their surfaces to be cemented were sandblasted with glass beads. Loads were applied 7,200 times a day for 1, 3, or 7-day period after cementing. The polycarboxylate and zinc phosphate cements showed higher crown retentions than glass ionomer cements. Although retention strength of glass ionomer cements was significantly increased by storing the cemented specimen in water for 7 days, repeated loading tended to decrease retention. In polycarboxylate cements and one brand of zinc phosphate cement employed, retention strengths were decreased when stored in water over 3 days. However, their highest levels were maintained or even positively impacted by repeated loading for 7 days.     

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.     

A comparison between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cement in orthodontics

In the past orthodontic band cementation has relied heavily on mechanically retentive cements such as zinc phosphate luting agents. The clinical performance of a glass ionomer cement (GIC), a chemically retentive cement, was evaluated against a conventional zinc phosphate cement (ZP). The recementation values for ZP were significantly higher over a 2-year treatment period than those of GIC. Failures between cement and enamel, and cement and stainless steel were noted for the ZP. Glass ionomer cement had significantly better retentive strength to enamel than to band material. Moisture contamination does not appear to be a problem in orthodontic band cementation with glass ionomer cement.     

不同粘固剂粘接金属冠与种植体钛基桩的固位力研究

目的:比较不同冠修复材料和不同粘固剂对种植体基桩与全冠之间粘固力的影响。方法:加工镍铬合金冠、钴铬合金冠、高金合金冠及钛合金冠各24个,每种金属冠分别使用玻璃离子水门汀、聚羧酸锌水门汀、磷酸锌水门汀、EB复合树脂粘固于钛基桩之上,测试拉伸强度。结果:4种金属冠在基底冠与钛基桩之间的固位力分别为542.11 N,560.45 N,843.14 N,780.70 N;4种粘固剂在冠与钛基桩之间的固位力分别614.33 N,606.67 N,708.38 N,797.03 N。结论:高金合金冠与钛基桩之间的粘接力最高,EB复合树脂粘接效果明显优于其他3种无机粘固剂。     

Retention of orthodontic bands with new fluoride-releasing cements

The prevalence of enamel decalcification beneath orthodontic bands has indicated the need for a fluoride-releasing, enamel-adhesive orthodontic luting cement. The purpose of this study was to compare the retentive bond strengths of orthodontic bands cemented with two new fluoride-releasing cements, a zinc polycarboxylate and a glass ionomer, with the retentive bond strength of bands cemented with the standard orthodontic cement zinc phosphate. The site of cement failure was also evaluated. One hundred eighty extracted human molar teeth were embedded in resin blocks and randomly assigned to three cement groups. Adapted bands were cemented by a clinically acceptable technique. The cemented teeth were then assigned to one of three time intervals--24 hours, 7 days, and 60 days--and thermocycled in synthetic saliva. The force required to initially fracture the cement bond was used as a measure of cement retention. By means of the Instron, a tensile load was applied to each cemented band. The maximum retentive strength (cement failure) was interpreted from the stress-strain curve at the point where linearity deviated. The failure site was judged subjectively: between cement and enamel, within the cement, or between cement and the band. Using stress at failure, an analysis of variance showed no significant differences among the retentive strengths of the three cements. The chi-square test revealed a significant difference (P less than 0.01) between failure sites of the zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cements. Significantly more bands cemented with the glass ionomer failed at the cement/band interface, leaving the cement adhered to the tooth.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Retention of castings with glass ionomer cement

The retentive abilities of a glass ionomer cement, a zinc phosphate cement, and a zinc silicophosphate cement were compared using 20 cast-gold inlays. The mean retentive strength of the glass ionomer cement was the greatest and that of the zinc phosphate cement the weakest. The differences between the mean retentive strengths of all three cements were statistically significant (p = .001).     

Leakage of various types of luting agents

Freshly extracted molar teeth were prepared for complete cast gold crowns cemented with either zinc phosphate cement, polycarboxylate cement, glass ionomer cement, a resin luting agent, or a zinc oxide-eugenol temporary cement. The specimens were tested at 1-, 6-, and 12-month intervals with radioactive 45Ca. The specimens were sectioned, autoradiographs were made, and the marginal leakage was evaluated on a scale of 0 to 3. The results showed that zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate, and glass ionomer cements are equally suited for permanent cementation of restorations. The resin luting agent showed high initial leakage, indicating that it is not as desirable for permanent cementation purposes. The zinc oxide-eugenol cement showed increased leakage with time but is well suited for its indicated purpose, temporary cementation.     

Comparative Evaluation of Bond Strengths of Different Core Materials with Various Luting Agents Used for Cast Crown Restorations

The coronal cast restoration continues to be used commonly to restore mutilated, endodontically treated teeth. The tensile bond strength of luting cements is of critical importance as many of failures are at the core and the crown interface. An invitro study with aim to evaluate and compare bond strengths of luting cements between different core materials and cast crowns. A total of 45 extracted identical mandibular second premolars were endodontically treated and divided into 3 groups of 15 each. Specimens in first group were restored with cast post and core (Group C), and specimens in second group were restored with stainless steel parapost and composite core material (Group B) and specimens in third group were restored with stainless steel parapost and glass ionomer core build (Group G). Standardized crown preparation was done for all the specimens to receive cast crowns. Each group was further divided into 3 subgroups and were cemented using 3 different luting cements namely, resin cement, polycarboxylate cement, glass ionomer cement (Type I). The samples of each subgroup (n = 5) were subjected to tensile testing using Universal Testing Machine at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/min till the dislodgement of crown from the core surface was observed. The bond strengths were significantly different according one way ANOVA (F-150.76 and p < 0.0000). The results of the study showed that the specimens cemented with resin cement in cast core, composite core and glass ionomer core exhibited significantly higher bond strengths as compared to specimens cemented with glass ionomer and polycarboxylate cement. Composite resin core and resin cement combinations were superior to all other cement and core combinations tested.     

Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components.

There is limited dental literature evaluating the retentive capabilities of luting agents when used between metal components, such as cast metal restorations cemented onto machined metal implant abutments. This study compared the retentive strengths of 5 different classes of luting agents used to cement cast noble metal alloy crowns to 8-degree machined titanium cementable implant abutments from the Straumann ITI Implant System. Sixty prefabricated 5.5-mm solid titanium implant abutments and implants were used; 30 received the standard surface preparation and the other 30 received an anodized surface preparation. Anodized implant components were used to reflect current implant marketing. Sixty castings were fabricated and randomly paired with an abutment and implant. A total of 12 castings were cemented onto the implant-abutment assemblies for each of the 5 different luting agents (zinc phosphate, resin composite, glass ionomer, resin-reinforced glass ionomer, and zinc oxide-non-eugenol). After cementation, the assemblies were stored in a humidor at room temperature prior to thermocycling for 24 hours. Each casting was pulled from its respective abutment, and the force at which bond failure occurred was recorded as retentive strength. A statistically significant difference was found between the 5 cements at P < or = .001. Of the cements used, resin composite demonstrated the highest mean retentive strength. Zinc phosphate and resin-reinforced glass-ionomer cements were the next most retentive, while glass ionomer and zinc oxide-non-eugenol cements demonstrated minimal retention. In addition, retention was not altered by the use of an anodized abutment surface.     

Luting cements: a review and comparison

The paper discusses strength, retention, film thickness, working time, solubility, early sensitivity to water, biocompatibility and handling properties of zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate and glass ionomer cements. Zinc phosphate cement has acceptable strength, working time and biological properties. It is easy to handle, even when mixing large quantities. Polycarboxylate cement has less strength, different flow properties and a shorter working time, but excellent biocompatibility. The polycarboxylate cement is an alternative where pulp reactions are expected to occur and the load on the restoration during mastication is limited. Glass ionomer cement has the highest strength and retentive properties and a low solubility. It is difficult to spatulate, the working time is short, and contact with water during setting is critical for the quality of the surface layer of the material. The biological properties of glass ionomer cements are similar to those of zinc phosphate cements. It is an alternative to zinc phosphate cement where normal retention is impossible to obtain.     

Retentive strength, disintegration, and marginal quality of luting cements.

This study evaluated the retention of complete crowns by using five different methods of cementation. Complete crowns were prepared with standardized dimensions on extracted human molars. Metal crowns were cast with a high noble gold ceramic alloy and were cemented with zinc phosphate cement, glass ionomer cement, composite resin cement, composite resin cement with a dentinal bonding agent, and adhesive resin cement. The retention was measured by subjecting the specimens to tensile load until fracture occurred. The disintegration was measured according to American Dental Association Specification No. 8, and the condition of the cements at the margins of crowns was analyzed by use of a scanning electron microscope. Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences between the mean retentive strengths. The retention of the zinc phosphate and the glass ionomer groups was significantly different from that of the adhesive resin group. The retention of the adhesive resin cement was 65% greater than the retention of the composite resin and the composite resin/dentinal bonding agent group, but the Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon rank sum test did not depict this difference as significant. The mean +/- SD of the disintegration for the zinc phosphate, the glass ionomer cement, and the composite resin cement was 0.025 +/- 0.013, 0.023 +/- 0.011, and 0.017 +/- 0.001, respectively. The scanning electron microscope analysis of the margins revealed that the composite resin cement was almost intact, the zinc phosphate was subjected to limited disintegration, and the glass ionomer displayed the worst marginal integrity.     

Effects of cement, cement space, marginal design, seating aid materials, and seating force on crown cementation

An evaluation of the effects of a die spacer, the seating force, the marginal design, seating aid materials, and the cement type during cementation was conducted. Two stainless steel dies were used: one with a 1 mm shoulder and the other with a shoulder and a 65-degree bevel. Ten stone dies were produced from each metal die and half were painted with four layers of die spacer. The crowns were waxed on the dies and cast in a nonprecious alloy, and the seating of crowns was measured with a micrometer before and after cementation. Comparisons were made between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cements under two seating forces of 5 and 30 lb using an orangewood stick or E-Z-bite seating aid. ANOVA and the Newman-Keuls test revealed that the use of a die spacer, a heavier force of 30 lb, and glass ionomer cement significantly improved crown seating. The beveled preparation led to superior crown seating when the heavier force or glass ionomer cement was used. The orangewood stick and bite device had a similar effect on crown seating.     

An evaluation of a glass ionomer luting agent: pulpal histological response

Pulpal histological response after crown cementation with a glass ionomer luting agent was evaluated and compared with the response to a polycarboxylate cement or a varnish plus zinc phosphate cement. Pulpal histological response was evaluated on teeth that had full crowns cemented with the test luting agents 3, 10, and 56 days after cementation. No statistically significant differences were found in pulpal histological response between the materials tested during all periods. These findings suggest that factors other than pulpal inflammation are contributing to the reported hypersensitivity after cementation associated with glass ionomer luting agents.     

Comparison of effect of desensitizing agents on the retention of crowns cemented with luting agents: an in vitro study

PURPOSE

Many dentists use desensitizing agents to prevent hypersensitivity. This study compared and evaluated the effect of two desensitizing agents on the retention of cast crowns when cemented with various luting agents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety freshly extracted human molars were prepared with flat occlusal surface, 6 degree taper and approximately 4 mm axial length. The prepared specimens were divided into 3 groups and each group is further divided into 3 subgroups. Desensitizing agents used were GC Tooth Mousse and GLUMA® desensitizer. Cementing agents used were zinc phosphate, glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement. Individual crowns with loop were made from base metal alloy. Desensitizing agents were applied before cementation of crowns except for control group. Under tensional force the crowns were removed using an automated universal testing machine. Statistical analysis included one-way ANOVA followed by Turkey-Kramer post hoc test at a preset alpha of 0.05.

RESULTS

Resin modified glass ionomer cement exhibited the highest retentive strength and all dentin treatments resulted in significantly different retentive values (In Kg.): GLUMA (49.02 ± 3.32) > Control (48.61 ± 3.54) > Tooth mousse (48.34 ± 2.94). Retentive strength for glass ionomer cement were GLUMA (41.14 ± 2.42) > Tooth mousse (40.32 ± 3.89) > Control (39.09 ± 2.80). For zinc phosphate cement the retentive strength were lowest GLUMA (27.92 ± 3.20) > Control (27.69 ± 3.39) > Tooth mousse (25.27 ± 4.60).

CONCLUSION

The use of GLUMA® desensitizer has no effect on crown retention. GC Tooth Mousse does not affect the retentive ability of glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement, but it decreases the retentive ability of zinc phosphate cement.     

不同制作和粘接方法对铸造金属桩核固位性影响的研究

目的:探索铸造金属桩核制作方法、粘接方法和粘接剂种类对其固位的影响。方法:选择80颗完整的新鲜无龋坏下颌单根管双尖牙,在釉牙骨质界上2 mm处去除临床牙冠,行根管治疗,根管预备和铸造桩核制作及粘接。根据制作方法将80个样本分为两大组(直接法和间接法),每组40个。每组又根据粘接方法(使用螺旋输送器和未使用)和粘接剂(玻璃离子水门汀和磷酸锌水门汀)不同下分4小组,每组10个样本。将样本置于23 ℃室温生理盐水中存放24 h后放置于万能力学测试机上,以0.5mm/min的速度进行拉力试验直到失败,从而得出固位力大小。结果:本实验中影响固位力的最明显因素为粘接方法,使用了螺旋输送器组的固位力明显高于未使用螺旋输送器组(P<0.05);不同制作方法对固位力无明显影响(P>0.05),使用磷酸锌粘接剂组固位力高于使用玻璃离子粘接剂组。然而制作方法,粘接方法和粘接剂种类间是有密切的交互作用的(P<0.05)。结论:制作方法并不影响铸造桩核的固位力,磷酸锌粘接剂性能优于玻璃离子粘接剂,粘接方法对固位力有显著的影响,建议在粘接过程中使用螺旋输送器。     

The influence of surface roughness on the retentive ability of two dental luting cements

Two series of brass cones and two series of dentine posts with varying surface roughness were produced. Maximum roughness value and arithmetical mean roughness were recorded for each cone. Brass crowns were cemented either with zinc phosphate cement (De Trey's zinc Cenment Improved) or with polycarboxylate cement (Durelon). A tensile stress was applied until the crown and the cone separated. The retentive force in relation to retention area was measured. The results showed that the retentive ability of both cements increased with increasing surface roughness. The increase in retention was greater for brass than for dentine. Differences were also found between the two cements; on smooth surfaces the zinc phosphate cement had a lower retentive ability than the polycarboxylate cement, but on rough surfaces the opposite relationship was observed.     

Retrievability of implant‐retained crowns following cementation

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the retrievability of cemented implant crowns using two different removal devices. The influence of five cement types and two cement application techniques was evaluated. Methods: Forty copings were cast from a CoCr alloy for 40 tapered titanium abutments (5° taper, 4.3 mm diameter, 6 mm height, Camlog, Germany). Twenty copings were modeled as single crowns, whereas 20 copings were modeled with an extension to simulate fixed partial dentures (FPDs). Before cementation, the inner surfaces of the copings were air‐abraded (50 μm Al₂O₃ particles at 2.5 bars), while the abutments were used as delivered with machined surfaces. Copings were cemented with eugenol‐free zinc oxide (Freegenol), zinc phosphate (Harvard), glass ionomer (Ketac Cem), polycarboxylate (Durelon) and so‐called self‐adhesive resin (RelyX Unicem) cement. Cement was applied in a thin film band of 1 or 3 mm to the cervical margin of the inner surface of the copings, respectively. After cementation, specimens were stored in saline solution for 24 h. The Coronaflex and a standardized custom‐made removal device were used to remove the copings from the abutments. Results: Using the same cement, no statistically significant influence with regard to the type of restoration (crown/FDP), cement application mode and device was detected (P>0.05). Therefore, data of specimens cemented with the same cement were pooled. Median attempts to remove the copings were: zinc oxide: 3, self‐adhesive resin: 3, zinc phosphate: 5, glass ionomer: 16 and polycarboxylate: 58. Four levels of significance (P<0.0001) were found: (1) zinc oxide/self‐adhesive resin; (2) zinc phosphate; (3) glass ionomer; and (4) polycarboxylate. Conclusions: Zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cement might be suitable for a so‐called ‘semipermanent’ (=retrievable) cementation, while polycarboxylate seems to provide the most durable cementation.     

四种粘固剂对种植体钛基桩与非贵金属金瓷基底冠之间固位力的影响

目的：比较四种粘固剂对种植体钛基桩与金瓷（非贵金属）基底冠之间粘结力的影响。方法：24个纯钛基桩和镍铬烤瓷合金基底冠,分为4组,分别使用玻璃离子水门汀、聚羧酸锌水门汀、磷酸锌水门汀、EB复合树脂粘固,测试拉伸强度。结果：4种粘固剂在基桩与基底冠之间产生的固位力分别为485．75N,504．33N,552．31N,626,06N。结论：使用EB复合树脂粘结钛基桩和金瓷基底冠时,固位力明显优于其它三种尤机粘固剂。     

The Effect of Die Spacer on Retention and Fitting of Complete Cast Crowns

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effect of die spacer on the fit and retention of complete cast crowns by using three different cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized full crown restoration preparations were completed on 99 extracted molar teeth, impressions were made with poly(vinyl siloxane), and stone dies were made. Dies were covered with four layers of die spacer using three techniques: (1) covering the occlusal and 1/3 of the axial surfaces, (2) covering the occlusal and 2/3 of the axial surfaces, and (3) covering the entire preparation except the apical 0.5 mm of the preparation. Complete metal crowns were cast using Pors-on 4 alloy. Crowns were then assigned to one of three luting agent groups: resin modified glass ionomer cement, resin cement, or zinc phosphate cement. The castings were placed on their respective teeth and the marginal opening was recorded by two methods: 72 specimens were examined before and after cementation using optical microscopy with 0.001 mm resolution, and 27 specimens were examined after cementation with scanning electron microscopy. After cementation, the teeth were thermocycled for 700 cycles between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. The tensile retentive strength was measured on a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The data obtained for the fitting were recorded in millimeters and the data for the tensile retentive strength were recorded in KgF. The statistical analysis was performed by analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey's test (p< 0.05). RESULTS: Before cementation, better marginal fit was obtained when the die spacer covered all but the area 0.5 mm short of the margin of the preparation; however, after cementation, the resin modified glass ionomer cement group had the best fit with the same application of die spacer. Castings luted with resin cement required the greatest tensile force to produce cement failure. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the area of the die surface covered with spacer improved the fit of the cast restoration. After cementation, the resin modified glass ionomer showed better adaptation; however, the optical microscopy and scanning microscopy correlate well. Resin cement had the highest resistance to tensile forces.