Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://www.revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.13218
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Rely XTM U200 versus Rely XTM ARC: uma comparação da resistência à microtração

Rely XTM U200 versus Rely XTM ARC: a comparison of microtensile bond strength

Eduardo DA-RÉ; Kellen Cristina da Silva GASQUE; Rafael Tobias MORETTI NETO

Downloads: 0
Views: 323

Resumo

Resumo: Introdução: Os cimentos resinosos são extensivamente utilizados na fixação de restaurações indiretas de cerâmica e cerômero, sendo classificados em duas categorias: os cimentos resinosos convencionais, que não apresentam uma adesão inerente à estrutura dental e requerem o uso de um sistema adesivo e os cimentos resinosos autoadesivos, que não requerem um tratamento adesivo prévio do substrato dentário.

Objetivo: Avaliar a resistência de união de dois cimentos resinosos, convencional e autoadesivo, quando utilizados na cimentação de restaurações cerâmicas e ceroméricas, trazendo elementos para propiciar melhor compreensão da interação adesiva em procedimentos de cimentação com as referidas categorias de cimentos resinosos.

Material e método: Dentes humanos (n=20), cedidos pelo banco de dentes da Universidade Federal de Alfenas (UNIFAL), foram preparados para que cilindros de cerâmica ou de cerômero fossem cimentados utilizando-se dois tipos de cimentos resinosos (autoadesivo e convencional). Após a cimentação, 20 palitos foram obtidos e submetidos ao teste de tração, avaliando-se a força necessária para a fratura. Os valores obtidos foram submetidos à análise estatística empregando-se a análise de variância (ANOVA) e o teste de Tukey.

Resultado: As forças mínimas e máximas necessárias ao rompimento do cimento convencional foram superiores às mesmas requeridas para o rompimento da união promovida pelo cimento autoadesivo, bem como as medianas e as médias aritméticas, independentemente do material restaurador empregado. O teste de Tukey demonstrou que as diferenças entre os cimentos empregados são estatisticamente significantes, independentemente do material restaurador.

Conclusão: Os resultados deste trabalho sugerem que o material utilizado para a confecção dos corpos de prova (cerâmica ou cerômero) não influenciou na resistência à tração, sendo que o cimento convencional apresentou valores superiores de resistência.

Palavras-chave

Microtração, cimentos resinosos, restaurações indiretas

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Resin cements are extensively used in the fixation of indirect restorations of ceramics and ceramics, divided into two categories: conventional resin cements, which do not present an inherent adhesion to the dental structure and require the use of an adhesive system, and the self-adhesive resin cements, which do not require a prior adhesive treatment of the dental substrate. Objective: To evaluate the microtensile bond strength of two resin-based cements, conventional and self-adhesive, according to required operating protocols, when luting ceramic and indirect composite restorations.

Material and method: Human molars (n=20) donated by UNIFAL teeth bank were prepared and, after being divided into two groups, ceramic or composite cylinders were luted to them with two resin-based cements (conventional and self-adhesive). Prepared teeth were sectioned vertically in both buccal-lingual and mesio-distal directions, to obtain 8 mm high, square-shaped “sticks” that were subject to microtensile bond strength test, and the necessary force to fracture them was evaluated. Results were subject to two-way ANOVA and Tukey test.

Result: Minimum and maximum forces to disrupt conventional cement were greater than the required one for self-adhesive cement, as well as mean bond strength, despíte of the restorative material. Tukey test showed that diferences were statistically significant, regardless the restorative material.

Conclusion: Restorative materials did not influence microtensile bond strength values, with no statistically significant differences. The difference between microtensile bond strength values of resin cements tested was statistically significant.
 

Keywords

Micro-tensile, bond strength, resin cements

References

Haddad MF, Rocha EP, Assunção WG. Cementation of prosthetic restorations: from conventional cementation to dental bonding concept. J Craniofac Surg. 2011 May;22(3):952-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31820fe205. PMid:21558917.

Melo RM, Özcan M, Barbosa SH, Galhano G, Amaral R, Bottino MA, et al. Bond strength of two resin cements on dentin using different cementation strategies. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2010 Aug;22(4):262-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00349.x. PMid:20690956.

Anusavice KJ. Phillips, materiais dentários. 11ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier; 2005.

Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Davidson CL, De Gee AJ, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. Dual cure luting composites – part II: clinically related properties. J Oral Rehabil. 1994 Jan;21(1):57-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1994.tb01124.x. PMid:8133389.

Ferracane JL, Stansbury JW, Burke FJ. Self-adhesive resin cements - chemistry, properties and clinical considerations. J Oral Rehabil. 2011 Apr;38(4):295-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02148.x. PMid:21133983.

Manso AP, Silva NR, Bonfante EA, Pegoraro TA, Dias RA, Carvalho RM. Cements and adhesives for all-ceramic restorations. Dent Clin North Am. 2011 Apr;55(2):311-32, ix. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2011.01.011. PMid: 21473996.

Perdigao J, Geraldeli S, Hodges JS. Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: effect on postoperative sensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 Dec;134(12):1621-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0109. PMid:14719760.

Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater. 2011 Jan;27(1):17-28.; published online Nov 24, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.023. PMid:21109301.

Silva e Souza MH Jr, Carneiro KG, Lobato MF, Silva e Souza PA, de Góes MF. Adhesive systems: important aspects related to their composition and clinical use. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010 May-Jun;18(3):207-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572010000300002. PMid:20856995.

Pashley DH, Tay FR, Breschi L, Tjäderhane L, Carvalho RM, Carrilho M, et al. State of the art of etch-and-rinse adhesives. Dent Mater. 2011 Jan;27(1):1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.016. PMid:21112620.

Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical efectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater. 2005 Sep;21(9):864-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.02.003. PMid:16009415.

Radovic I, Monticelli F, Goracci C, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Self-adhesive resin cements: a literature review. J Adhes Dent. 2008 Aug;10(4):251-8. PMid:18792695.

Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, Züchner H, Schäfer E. Chemical analysis and bonding reaction of RelyX Unicem and Bifix composites – a comparative study. Dent Mater. 2006 Oct;22(10):934-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.10.004. PMid:16364427.

Anchieta RB, Rocha EP, de Almeida EO, Freitas AC Jr, Martini AP. Bonding all-ceramic restorations with two resins cement techniques: a clinical report of three-year follow- up. Eur J Dent. 2011 Aug;5(4):478-85. PMid:21912505.

Pameijer CH, Stanley HR. Pulp reactions to resin cements. Am J Dent. 1992 Apr;5(2):81-7. PMid:1524752.

Aguiar TR, Andre CB, Arrais CAG, Bedran-Russo AK, Giannini M. Micromorphology of resin–dentin interfaces using self-adhesive and conventional resin cements: A confocal laser and scanning electron microscope analysis. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2012 Oct;38:69-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2012.05.009.

Pisani-Proença J, Erhardt MC, Amaral R, Valandro LF, Bottino MA, Del Castillo-Salmerón R. Influence of different surface conditioning protocols on microtensile bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin. J Prosthet Dent. 2011 Apr;105(4):227-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(11)60037-1. PMid:21458647.

Burgess JO, Ghuman T, Cakir D, Swift EJ Jr. Self-adhesive resin cements. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2010 Dec;22(6):412-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00378.x. PMid:21171499.

De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 2004 Dec;20(10):963-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.002. PMid:15501325.

Goracci C, Cury AH, Cantoro A, Papacchini F, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Microtensile bond strength and interfacial properties of self-etching and self-adhesive resin cements used to lute composite onlays under different seating forces. J Adhes Dent. 2006 Oct;8(5):327-35. PMid:17080881.

Fuentes MV, Ceballos L, González-López S. Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to different treated indirect composites. Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Apr;17(3):717-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0752-y. PMid:22619093.

Qeblawi DM, Campillo-Funollet M, Muñoz CA. In vitro shear bond strength of two self-adhesive resin cements to zirconia. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Feb;113(2):122-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.08.006. PMid:25438742.

Skupien JA, Porto JA, Münchow EA, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Impairment of resin cement application on the bond strength of indirect composite restorations. Braz Oral Res. 2015;29(1):1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0066. PMid:26039908.

Kim JY, Cho GY, Roh BD, Shin Y. Effect of curing mode on shear bond strength of self-adhesive cement to composite blocks. Materials (Basel). 2016 Mar;9(3):E210. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma9030210. PMid:28773334.

Gundogdu M, Aladag LI. Effect of adhesive resin cements on bond strength of ceramic core materials to dentin. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018 Mar;21(3):367-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_10_17. PMid:29519988.

Hitz T, Stawarczyk B, Fischer J, Hämmerle CH, Sailer I. Are self-adhesive resin cements a valid alternative to conventional resin cements? A laboratory study of the long-term bond strength. Dent Mater. 2012 Nov;28(11):1183-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.09.006. PMid:22999370.

Ayyildiz S, Emir F, Tunc EP, Sen D. Shear bond strength of various luting cements to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. Appl Adhes Sci. 2015;3(1):13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z.
 

5c826b980e8825d601019bd4 rou Articles
Links & Downloads

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections