Resin Cement Residue Removal Techniques: In Vitro Analysis of Marginal Defects and Discoloration Intensity Using Micro-CT and Stereomicroscopy

The impact of inorganic fillers, organic content, and polymerization mode on the degree of conversion of monomers in resin-matrix cements for restorative dentistry: a scoping review

PURPOSE

The main aim of the present study was to carry out a scoping review on the differences in degree of conversion of monomers regarding several types resin cements, indirect restorative materials, and light-curing procedures used in dentistry.

METHOD

A bibliographic review was performed on PubMed using the following search items: "degree of conversion" OR "filler" AND "resin cement" OR "inorganic cement" AND "organic" OR "radiopacity" OR "refractive" OR "transmittance" OR "type" AND "resin composite." The search involved articles published in English language within the last thirteen years. A research question has been formulated following the PICO approach as follow: "How different is the degree of conversion of monomers comparing several types of resin-matrix cements?".

RESULTS

Within the 15 selected studies, 8 studies reported a high degree of conversion (DC) of the organic matrix ranging from 70 up to 90% while 7 studies showed lower DC values. Dual-cured resin-matrix cements revealed the highest mean values of DC, flexural strength, and hardness when compared with light- and self-polymerized ones. DC mean values of resin-matrix cements light-cured through a ceramic veneer with 0.4 mm thickness were higher (~ 83%) than those recorded for resin-matrix cements light-cured through a thicker ceramic layer of 1.5 mm (~ 77%).

CONCLUSIONS

The highest percentage of degree of conversion of monomers was reported for dual-cured resin-matrix cements and therefore both chemical and light-induced pathways promoted an enhanced polymerization of the material. Similar degree of conversion of the same resin-matrix cement were recorded when the prosthetic structure showed a low thickness. On thick prosthetic structures, translucent materials are required to allow the light transmission achieving the resin-matrix cement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The chemical composition of resin-matrix cements and the light-curing mode can affect the polymerization of the organic matrix. Thus, physical properties of the materials can vary leading to early clinical failures at restorative interfaces. Thus, the analysis of the polymerization pathways of resin-matrix cements is significantly beneficial for the clinical performance of the restorative interfaces.

Evaluation of the ceramic laminate veneer-tooth interface after different resin cement excess removal techniques

OBJECTIVES

To compare, in vitro, resin cement excess removal techniques at the veneer-tooth interface.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Anterior human teeth were restored with ceramic veneers and randomly divided according to the following techniques (n = 10): removal of excess resin cement with brush and dental floss, followed by light-curing with Valo (Group 1) or Elipar (Group 2) for 1 min and 40 s; tack-curing with Valo (Group 3) or Elipar (Group 4) for 1 s; and tack-curing with Valo (Group 5) or Elipar (Group 6) for 5 s. The tack-curing was followed by removal of excess with probe and dental floss and light-curing for 1 min and 40 s. The area of excess resin cement (mm2) was measured in micro-CT images using AutoCAD program. The failures at the cervical margin in the X, Y, and Z axes (µm) of greater value were measured using the DataViewer program. The specimens were submitted to microleakage with 2% basic fuchsin.

RESULTS

According to the Kruskal-Wallis and multiple comparison test, the highest area of excess resin cement was found in Group 1 (5.06 mm2), which did not differ statistically from Groups 2 (3.70 mm2) and 5 (2.19 mm2). Groups 2, 3 (1.73 mm2), 4 (1.14 mm2), and 5 (2.18 mm2) did not differ statistically. Group 6 (0.77 mm2) obtained the lowest value, which did not differ statistically from Groups 3 and 4. According to the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn test, there was no significant difference in failures in X (p = 0.981), Y (p = 0.860), and Z (p = 0.638) axes and no significant difference in microleakage (p = 0.203) among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tack-curing for 1 s or 5 s, followed by removal of excess resin cement using a probe and a dental floss, tended to result in a lower amount of excess material around the margin.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The technique used for resin cement excess removal influences the amount of excess leaved at the veneer-tooth interface. Tack-curing for 1 s or 5 s is recommended to mitigate the excess resin cement.

Effect of Temporary Cement, Surface Pretreatment and Tooth Area on the Bond Strength of Adhesively Cemented Ceramic Overlays-An In Vitro Study

Several viewpoints have been reported regarding the effect of temporary cements, different surface pretreatment protocols before adhesive cementation, and predictive factors. This in vitro study tested if temporary cement, pretreatment of the tooth surface, the size of enamel or dentine influence adhesive cementation to zirconia ceramics. Twenty premolars were prepared for determination of enamel and dentin area, bond strength test and failure analysis. The samples were divided into two groups: untreated prior adhesive cementation (n = 10) and with temporary cementation done, pretreated prior adhesive cementation (n = 10). Zirconia overlays (Katana Zirconia STML) were cemented on the grounded flat teeth surfaces using Panavia V5. An additional six premolars underwent dentine tubule analysis with SEM to detect temporary cement residues after temporary cementation on an untreated tooth surface (n = 3) and on a pretreated surface (n = 3). The independent sample t-test was used to compare the two groups and the means of the total tooth, dentin or enamel areas did not differ significantly between the untreated and pretreated specimens. The mean tensile bond strength was significantly (p = 0.005) higher in the pretreated specimens (337N) than in the untreated ones (204N). The overall multivariable linear regression model with three predictors (surface pre-treatment, enamel area and dentine area) was significant (p = 0.003), among which the size of enamel was the strongest predictor (β = 0.506; p = 0.049), followed by the pretreatment effect (β = 0.478; p = 0.001) and the size of dentin area (β = -0.105; p = 0.022).