A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effect of surface preparation on bond strength of resin luting cements to dentin. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study investigated how different burs affect the bond strength of resin cements on dentin surfaces prepared from human teeth.
  • The research found that while preparation type and cement used both significantly impacted bond strength, their interaction didn't show a significant effect.
  • Notably, using a tungsten carbide bur yielded better bond strengths with Panavia F2.0, while the other cements showed decreased bond strength with diamond bur preparation.

Article Abstract

This study examined the effects of using two different burs for dentin surface preparation on the microtensile bond strength (microTBS) of three resin luting cements. Flat, deep dentin surfaces from 45 extracted human third molars were divided into three groups (n = 15) according to bur type: (i) diamond bur and (ii) tungsten carbide bur. The controls were abraded with #600-grit SiC paper. Both burs operated in a high-speed handpiece under water-cooling. Composite blocks were luted onto the dentin using one of three cements: RelyX ARC (ARC, 3M ESPE), Panavia F2.0 (PF, Kuraray) and RelyX Unicem (UN, 3M ESPE) following the manufacturers' instructions. For ARC, the dentin surface was treated with 32% phosphoric acid. The bonded specimens were stored at 37 degrees C for 24 hours and sectioned into 0.9 x 0.9 mm beams for microTBS testing. The data were analyzed using the two-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls tests. Representative fractured beams from each group were prepared for fractographic analysis under SEM. Two-way ANOVA revealed that the effects of "dentin surface preparation" and "luting cement" were statistically significant (p < 0.001); however, the interaction of these two factors was not significant (p > 0.05). ARC showed no significant difference in microTBS among the three differently prepared dentin surfaces. The microTBS of PF and UN was significantly lower when bonding to dentin prepared with a diamond bur (p < 0.05), compared to the control. For Panavia F2.0, higher bond strengths were achieved on the dentin surface prepared with a tungsten carbide bur. Proper bur selection is essential to optimizing the dentin adhesion of self-etch resin luting cements.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2341/09-379-LDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

resin luting
12
luting cements
12
dentin surface
12
dentin
9
surface preparation
8
bond strength
8
microtbs three
8
dentin surfaces
8
diamond bur
8
tungsten carbide
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!