File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Effect of Dentine Conditioning on Adhesion of RM-Glass Ionomer Cements

TitleEffect of Dentine Conditioning on Adhesion of RM-Glass Ionomer Cements
Authors
KeywordsAcid etch
Adhesion
Dental materials
Dentin bonding agents and Glass ionomers
Issue Date2013
PublisherSage Publications, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsProdDesc.nav?prodId=Journal201925
Citation
The 91st General Session General Session & Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), Seattle, Washington, USA, 20-23 March 2013. In Journal of Dental Research, 2013, v. 92, Special Issue A, abstract no. 2381 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: Recently, a new resin modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) adhesive was introduced with manufacturer’s instructions suggesting phosphoric acid etching for dentine surface treatment which has been regarded as not ideal. This study aimed to investigate the use of phosphoric acid as a surface treatment when bonding RM-GIC adhesives Method: Caries-free human teeth were used as the bonding substrate. Three RM-GICs were tested: Fuji Bond LC (FJ: GC Corp, Japan), Riva Bond LC (RB: SDI, Aust) and Ketac Nano (KN:3M-ESPE, USA). Surface treatment was either 37% phosphoric acid for 5 sec or 10% polyacrylic acid (PAA) for 10 sec, or following manufacturer’s recommended methods, Fuji Bond LC: Cavity Conditioner (10 sec) and Ketac Nano: Ketac Nano priming agent (15 sec). Teeth were finished with 600-grit SiC paper, the surface treated then bonded with one of the RM-GICs and stored for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned (cross-sectional area approx. 1mm2) and subjected to microtensile bond testing. Five teeth were tested for each adhesive-treatment combination (15 sticks prepared from each tooth). ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to analyse results. Result: The use of phosphoric acid etch for FJ (24.8 MPa) and RB (25 MPa) produced the highest strengths but were not statistically better than PAA (FJ: 21.9 MPA; RB 22.4 MPa) or Cavity Conditioner (FJ:21 MPa), P>0.05. KN showed statistically lower bond strengths for phosphoric acid (17.2 MPa), PAA (15.6) and the primer (14 MPa), P<0.05 compared with the FJ or RB. Failure mode showed no specific trend with surface treatment method. Conclusion: It would seem for RM-GICs a very short etch with phosphoric acid does not have an adverse effect on bond strengths in the short-term, but is no better than using 10% PAA. Long-term adhesion tests are needed to further clarify which surface preparation method is best.
DescriptionPoster Session: Bond Strength: Indirect Bonding; Bonding to Composite, Metal, Composite Repair
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/186507
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 4.602
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.714

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBurrow, MFen_US
dc.contributor.authorHamama, HHHEen_US
dc.contributor.authorYiu, CKYen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-08-20T12:12:09Z-
dc.date.available2013-08-20T12:12:09Z-
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe 91st General Session General Session & Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), Seattle, Washington, USA, 20-23 March 2013. In Journal of Dental Research, 2013, v. 92, Special Issue A, abstract no. 2381en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-0345-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/186507-
dc.descriptionPoster Session: Bond Strength: Indirect Bonding; Bonding to Composite, Metal, Composite Repair-
dc.description.abstractObjective: Recently, a new resin modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC) adhesive was introduced with manufacturer’s instructions suggesting phosphoric acid etching for dentine surface treatment which has been regarded as not ideal. This study aimed to investigate the use of phosphoric acid as a surface treatment when bonding RM-GIC adhesives Method: Caries-free human teeth were used as the bonding substrate. Three RM-GICs were tested: Fuji Bond LC (FJ: GC Corp, Japan), Riva Bond LC (RB: SDI, Aust) and Ketac Nano (KN:3M-ESPE, USA). Surface treatment was either 37% phosphoric acid for 5 sec or 10% polyacrylic acid (PAA) for 10 sec, or following manufacturer’s recommended methods, Fuji Bond LC: Cavity Conditioner (10 sec) and Ketac Nano: Ketac Nano priming agent (15 sec). Teeth were finished with 600-grit SiC paper, the surface treated then bonded with one of the RM-GICs and stored for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned (cross-sectional area approx. 1mm2) and subjected to microtensile bond testing. Five teeth were tested for each adhesive-treatment combination (15 sticks prepared from each tooth). ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test were used to analyse results. Result: The use of phosphoric acid etch for FJ (24.8 MPa) and RB (25 MPa) produced the highest strengths but were not statistically better than PAA (FJ: 21.9 MPA; RB 22.4 MPa) or Cavity Conditioner (FJ:21 MPa), P>0.05. KN showed statistically lower bond strengths for phosphoric acid (17.2 MPa), PAA (15.6) and the primer (14 MPa), P<0.05 compared with the FJ or RB. Failure mode showed no specific trend with surface treatment method. Conclusion: It would seem for RM-GICs a very short etch with phosphoric acid does not have an adverse effect on bond strengths in the short-term, but is no better than using 10% PAA. Long-term adhesion tests are needed to further clarify which surface preparation method is best.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSage Publications, Inc.. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsProdDesc.nav?prodId=Journal201925-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Dental Researchen_US
dc.rightsJournal of Dental Research. Copyright © Sage Publications, Inc..-
dc.subjectAcid etch-
dc.subjectAdhesion-
dc.subjectDental materials-
dc.subjectDentin bonding agents and Glass ionomers-
dc.titleEffect of Dentine Conditioning on Adhesion of RM-Glass Ionomer Cementsen_US
dc.typeConference_Paperen_US
dc.identifier.emailBurrow, MF: mfburr58@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailYiu, CKY: ckyyiu@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityBurrow, MF=rp01306en_US
dc.identifier.authorityYiu, CKY=rp00018en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros216885en_US
dc.identifier.volume92-
dc.identifier.issueSpecial Issue A-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats