In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth

GÜÇLÜ, Zeynep Aslı; EFE, ZEKİYE

doi:10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064

In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth

Zekiye EFE, (Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pedodontics, Kayseri, Turkey)

Zeynep Aslı GÜÇLÜ ÖZKAYA (Erciyes University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pedodontics, Kayseri, Turkey)

Bezmiâlem Science

6 1

Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 177 - 184 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064 İndeks Tarihi: 14-06-2021

In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth

Öz:

Objective: Nowadays in pediatric dentistry clinics, zirconia crownshave become widespread restoration choice of primary teeth withextensive decay. Aim of this study was to evaluate shear bondstrength of different luting cements on zirconium oxide (zirconia)specimens in primary teeth.Methods: Eighty extracted primary molar teeth were selectedfor the study and teeth were randomly divided into four groups.Eighty zirconium oxide specimen were fabricated using CAD/CAMtechnology. Samples were cemented with zinc polycarboxylatecement (PK), conventional glass ionomer cement (GCIS), resinmodified GCIS (RMCIS) and self adhesive resin cement (RS). Aftercementation, samples were kept in distilled water for three days atroom temperature. Then speciemens were subjected to 1000 cyclesthermal cycle process. Shear bond strength was determined usinguniversal testing machine, debonded surfaces were examined usingstereomicroscope. Tamhane’s test was used for pairwise comparisonsof the mean bonding forces of the groups. Pearson chi-square testwas used to compare the debonded surfaces. Significance level (p)was accepted as 0.05 in the application of the tests.Results: Mean bond strength of RMCIS group was statisticallylower than RS, GCIS and PK cements (p<0.05). There wasn'tstatistically significant difference between mean bonding strength ofRS, GCIS and PK cement group (p>0.05). There wasn't statisticallysignificant difference between debonded surfaces of zirconiaspecimen after cementation with different bonding cements(p>0.05). Conclusion: We think that it may be more advantageous to adherezirconia crowns with self adhesive RS in pediatric patients whom aredifficult to provide moisture control.

Anahtar Kelime:

Süt Dişlerinde Farklı Yapıştırma Materyalleriyle Uygulanan Zirkonyum Oksit Örneklerin Bağlanma Dayanımının İn Vitro İncelenmesi

Öz:

Amaç: Son yıllarda çocuk diş hekimliğinde aşırı madde kaybı görülen süt dişlerinin restorasyonunda zirkonya kronların kullanımı yaygınlaşmaktadır. Çalışmamızda zirkonyum oksit (zirkonya) örneklerin farklı yapıştırma materyalleriyle kullanımlarının süt dişlerine bağlanma kuvvetine etkisinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Yöntemler: Çalışmada 80 adet çekilmiş süt azı dişi, her grupta yirmi diş olacak şekilde rastgele dört gruba ayrıldı. Seksen adet zirkonya örnek CAD/CAM kullanılarak üretildi. Örnekler çinko polikarboksilat siman (PK), geleneksel cam iyonomer siman (GCIS), rezin modifiye cam iyonomer siman (RMCIS) ve self adeziv rezin siman (RS) ile simante edildi. Simantasyon sonrası örnekler, distile su içerisinde oda sıcaklığında üç gün bekletildi. Sonrasında 1000 devir termal döngü işlemine tabi tutuldu. Termal döngü sonrası, bağlanma dayanımları üniversal test cihazında ölçüldü. Kopma yüzeyleri, ışık mikroskobunda incelendi. Grupların ortalama bağlanma kuvvetlerinin ikili karşılaştırılmasında Tamhane's testi kullanıldı. Kopma yüzeylerinin karşılaştırılmasında ise Pearson kikare testi kullanıldı. Testlerin uygulanmasında anlamlılık düzeyi (p>0,05) olarak kabul edildi. Bulgular: Çalışma sonunda RMCIS grubunun ortalama bağlanma kuvveti RS, GCIS ve PK siman göre daha düşük bulundu (p<0,05). RS, GCIS ve PK siman grubunun ortalama bağlanma kuvveti arasında istatistiksel olarak fark bulunmadı (p>0,05). Zirkonya örneklerin, farklı yapıştırma simanlarıyla simantasyonu sonrası kopma yüzeyleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık bulunmadı (p>0,05).Sonuç: Nem kontrolünün sağlanması zor olan çocuk hastalarda zirkonya kronların self adeziv rezin siman ile yapıştırılmasının daha avantajlı olabileceğini düşünüyoruz.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Griffin SO, Gooch BF, Beltran E, Sutherland JN, Barsley R. Dental services, costs, and factors associated with hospitalization for medicaid-eligible children, Louisiana 1996-97. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 2000 Winter;60:21-7.
2. Misra S, Tahmassebi JF, Brosnan M. Early childhood caries-a review. Dental Update 2007;34:556-64.
3. Oueis H, Atwan S, Pajtas B, Casamassimo PS. Use of anterior veneered stainless steel crowns by pediatric dentists. Pediatric Dentistry 2010;32:413-6.
4. Eidelman E, Faibis S, Peretz B. A comparison of restorations for children with early childhood caries treated under general anesthesia or conscious sedation. Pediatric Dentistry 2000;22:33-7.
5. Kagihara LE, Niederhauser VP, Stark M. Assessment, management, and prevention of early childhood caries. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners 2009;21:1-10.
6. Blatz MB. Long-term clinical success of all-ceramic posterior restorations. Quintessence International 2002;33:415-26.
7. MacLean JK, Champagne CE, Waggoner WF, Ditmyer MM, Casamassimo P. Clinical outcomes for primary anterior teeth treated with preveneered stainless steel crowns. Pediatric Dentistry 2007;29:377-81.
8. Shah PV, Lee JY, Wright JT. Clinical success and parental satisfaction with anterior preveneered primary stainless steel crowns. Pediatric Dentistry 2004;26:391-5.
9. Vagkopoulou T, Koutayas SO, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry: Part 1. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. The European Journal of Esthetic Dentistry 2009;4:130-51.
10. Yilmaz Y, Dalmis A, Gurbuz T, Simsek S. Retentive force and microleakage of stainless steel crowns cemented with three different luting agents. Dental Materials Journal 2004;23:577-84.
11. Guelmann M, Bookmyer KL, Villalta P, Garcia-Godoy F. Microleakage of restorative techniques for pulpotomized primary molars. Journal of Dentistry for Children 2004;71:209-11.
12. Nash DA. The nickel-chromium crown for restoring posterior primary teeth. Journal of the American Dental Association. 1981;102:44-9.
13. Burke FJ, Fleming GJ, Nathanson D, Marquis PM. Are adhesive technologies needed to support ceramics? An assessment of the current evidence. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 2002;4:7-22.
14. Gorodovsky S, Zidan O. Retentive strength, disintegration, and marginal quality of luting cements. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 1992;68:269-74.
15. Pekkan G, Hekimoglu C. Evaluation of shear and tensile bond strength between dentin and ceramics using dual-polymerizing resin cements. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2009;102:242-52.
16. Somani R, Jaidka S, Singh DJ, Sibal GK. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of various glass ionomer cements to dentin of primary teeth: An in vitro Study. International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry 2016;9:192-6.
17. Marshall SJ, Bayne SC, Baier R, Tomsia AP, Marshall GW. A review of adhesion science. Dental Materials 2010;26:e11-6.
18. Ernst CP, Cohnen U, Stender E, Willershausen B. In vitro retentive strength of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns using different luting agents. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2005;93:551-58.
19. Palacios RP, Johnson GH, Phillips KM, Raigrodski AJ. Retention of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns with three types of cement. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2006;96:104-14.
20. Nor JE, Feigal RJ, Dennison JB, Edwards CA. Dentin bonding: SEM comparison of the dentin surface in primary and permanent teeth. Pediatric Dentistry 1997;19:246-52.
21. Yaseen SM, Subba Reddy VV. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of two self-etching adhesives (sixth and seventh generation) on dentin of primary and permanent teeth: an in vitro study. Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry 2009;27:33-8.
22. Uekusa S, Yamaguchi K, Miyazaki M, Tsubota K, Kurokawa H, Hosoya Y. Bonding efficacy of single-step self-etch systems to sound primary and permanent tooth dentin. Operative Dentistry 2006;31:569-76.
23. Courson F, Bouter D, Ruse ND, Degrange M. Bond strengths of nine current dentine adhesive systems to primary and permanent teeth. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2005;32:296-303.
24. Dadakoglu N, Tuna AN, Aras S. Farklı yapıdaki yapıştırma simanlarının süt dişi mine ve dentinine bağlanmasının in vitro koşullarda değerlendirilmesi. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci 2012;18:269-76.
25. Caughman WF, Caughman GB, Dominy WT, Schuster GS. Glass ionomer and composite resin cements: effects on oral cells. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 1990;63:513-21.
26. Yap A, Lee CM. Water sorption and solubility of resin-modified polyalkenoate cements. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 1997;24:310- 4.

APA	EFE Z, GÜÇLÜ Z (2021). In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. , 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
Chicago	EFE ZEKİYE,GÜÇLÜ Zeynep Aslı In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. (2021): 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
MLA	EFE ZEKİYE,GÜÇLÜ Zeynep Aslı In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. , 2021, ss.177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
AMA	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. . 2021; 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
Vancouver	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. . 2021; 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
IEEE	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z "In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth." , ss.177 - 184, 2021. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
ISNAD	EFE, ZEKİYE - GÜÇLÜ, Zeynep Aslı. "In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth". (2021), 177-184. https://doi.org/10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064

APA	EFE Z, GÜÇLÜ Z (2021). In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmiâlem Science, 9(2), 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
Chicago	EFE ZEKİYE,GÜÇLÜ Zeynep Aslı In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmiâlem Science 9, no.2 (2021): 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
MLA	EFE ZEKİYE,GÜÇLÜ Zeynep Aslı In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmiâlem Science, vol.9, no.2, 2021, ss.177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
AMA	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmiâlem Science. 2021; 9(2): 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
Vancouver	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth. Bezmiâlem Science. 2021; 9(2): 177 - 184. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
IEEE	EFE Z,GÜÇLÜ Z "In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth." Bezmiâlem Science, 9, ss.177 - 184, 2021. 10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064
ISNAD	EFE, ZEKİYE - GÜÇLÜ, Zeynep Aslı. "In Vitro Evaluation of the Shear Bond Strength of Different Luting Cements on Zirconium Oxide Specimens in Primary Teeth". Bezmiâlem Science 9/2 (2021), 177-184. https://doi.org/10.14235/bas.galenos.2020.4064