PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was to compare the film thicknesses of several resin cements as a function of time after mixing and to examine the effect of working time on the film thicknesses.
Materials and methods
The film thickness (㎛) of 4 resin cements (n=10), 1 composite resin (Panavia F 2.0), 3 self-adhesive resin (Clearfil SA luting, Zirconite, RelyX U200) cements was measured at 20-second intervals after mixing of the cements up to 200 seconds under a load of 50 N. Linear regression was fitted to verify the effect of working time on the film thickness of each cement. Data were compared to the working time recommended by manufacturers using Wilcoxon test (α =.05).
Results
All of the materials showed a positive linear correlation between the film thickness and working time. There was no statistically significant difference between the working time based on our results and the values recommended by the manufacturers even though there was a discrepancy between those two values.
REFERENCES
1. Shillingburg HT, Sather DA Jr, Wilson EL Jr, Cain JR, Mitchell DL, Blanco LJ, Kessler JC. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 4th ed.Quintessense Pub., Co.;2012. p. 71–96.
2. Schwartz IS. A review of methods and techniques to improve the fit of cast restoration. J Prosthet Dent. 1986; 56:279–83.
3. Pilo R, Cardash HS, Baharav H, Helft M. Incomplete seating of cemented crowns: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1988; 59:429–33.
4. White SN, Yu Z. Film thickness of new adhesive luting agents. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 67:782–5.
5. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Crispin BJ. Dental luting agents: A review of the current literature. J Prosthet Dent. 1998; 80:280–301.
6. White SN, Yu Z, Kipnis V. Effect of seating force on film thickness of new adhesive luting agents. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 68:476–81.
7. Oilo G, Evje DM. Film thickness of dental luting cements. Dent Mater. 1986; 2:85–9.
8. Manhart J, Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, Chen HY, Hickel R. A 2-year clinical study of composite and ceramic inlays. Clin Oral Investig. 2000; 4:192–8.
9. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Porcelain veneers: a review of the literature. J Dent. 2000; 28:163–77.
10. Mitchell CA, Abbariki M, Orr JF. The influence of luting cement on the probabilities of survival and modes of failure of cast full-coverage crowns. Dent Mater. 2000; 16:198–206.
11. Knox J, Kralj B, Hü bsch PF, Middleton J, Jones ML. An evaluation of the influence of orthodontic adhesive on the stresses generated in a bonded bracket finite element model. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119:43–53.
12. el-Mowafy O, Rubo MH. Retention of a posterior resin-bond-ed fixed partial denture with a modified design: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2000; 13:425–31.
13. Kious AR, Roberts HW, Brackett WW. Film thicknesses of recently introduced luting cements. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 101:189–92.
14. Windeler AS. The use of film thickness to measure working time of zinc phosphate cements. J Dent Res. 1978; 57:697–701.
15. ISO 4049. Dentistry - Polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 2000.
16. Zortuk M, Bolpaca P, Kilic K, Ozdemir E, Aguloglu S. Effects of Finger Pressure Applied By Dentists during Cementation of All-Ceramic Crowns. Eur J Dent. 2010; 4:383–8.
17. Smith DC. Dental cements. Dent Clin North Am. 1971; 15:3–31.
Table 1.
Resin cements tested in this study
Table 2.
Manufacturer' s recommended working time and the time when the thickness reached 50 ㎛
XML Download