Comparison of effect of desensitizing agents on the retention of crowns cemented with luting agents: an in vitro study (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, 2012
PURPOSE. Many dentists use desensitizing agents to prevent hypersensitivity. This study compared and evaluated the effect of two desensitizing agents on the retention of cast crowns when cemented with various luting agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety freshly extracted human molars were prepared with flat occlusal surface, 6 degree taper and approximately 4 mm axial length. The prepared specimens were divided into 3 groups and each group is further divided into 3 subgroups. Desensitizing agents used were GC Tooth Mousse and GLUMA � desensitizer. Cementing agents used were zinc phosphate, glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement. Individual crowns with loop were made from base metal alloy. Desensitizing agents were applied before cementation of crowns except for control group. Under tensional force the crowns were removed using an automated universal testing machine. Statistical analysis included oneway ANOVA followed by Turkey-Kramer post hoc test at a preset alpha of 0.05. RESULTS. Resin modified glass ionomer cement exhibited the highest retentive strength and all dentin treatments resulted in significantly different retentive values (In Kg.): GLUMA (49.02 ± 3.32) > Control (48.61 ± 3.54) > Tooth mousse (48.34 ± 2.94). Retentive strength for glass ionomer cement were GLUMA (41.14 ± 2.42) > Tooth mousse (40.32 ± 3.89) > Control (39.09 ± 2.80). For zinc phosphate cement the retentive strength were lowest GLUMA (27.92 ± 3.20) > Control (27.69 ± 3.39) > Tooth mousse (25.27 ± 4.60). CONCLUSION. The use of GLUMA � desensitizer has no effect on crown retention. GC Tooth Mousse does not affect the retentive ability of glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement, but it decreases the retentive ability of zinc phosphate cement. [
International journal of preventive & clinical dental research, 2018
PURPOSE. Many dentists use desensitizing agents to prevent hypersensitivity. This study compared and evaluated the effect of two desensitizing agents on the retention of cast crowns when cemented with various luting agents. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety freshly extracted human molars were prepared with flat occlusal surface, 6 degree taper and approximately 4 mm axial length. The prepared specimens were divided into 3 groups and each group is further divided into 3 subgroups. Desensitizing agents used were GC Tooth Mousse and GLUMA � desensitizer. Cementing agents used were zinc phosphate, glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement. Individual crowns with loop were made from base metal alloy. Desensitizing agents were applied before cementation of crowns except for control group. Under tensional force the crowns were removed using an automated universal testing machine. Statistical analysis included oneway ANOVA followed by Turkey-Kramer post hoc test at a preset alpha of 0.05. RESULTS. Resin modified glass ionomer cement exhibited the highest retentive strength and all dentin treatments resulted in significantly different retentive values (In Kg.): GLUMA (49.02 ± 3.32) > Control (48.61 ± 3.54) > Tooth mousse (48.34 ± 2.94). Retentive strength for glass ionomer cement were GLUMA (41.14 ± 2.42) > Tooth mousse (40.32 ± 3.89) > Control (39.09 ± 2.80). For zinc phosphate cement the retentive strength were lowest GLUMA (27.92 ± 3.20) > Control (27.69 ± 3.39) > Tooth mousse (25.27 ± 4.60). CONCLUSION. The use of GLUMA � desensitizer has no effect on crown retention. GC Tooth Mousse does not affect the retentive ability of glass ionomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement, but it decreases the retentive ability of zinc phosphate cement. [
Analysis of impact of desensitizing agents on the retention of crowns cemented with luting agents
International journal of health sciences
The present study was undertaken for assessing the impact of desensitizing agents on the retention of crowns cemented with luting agents. 40 freshly extracted mandibular molar teeth were selected. Two study groups were made: Group C: Control group-Glass ionomer cement; and Group G: Study group-GC Tooth Mousse desensitizer. Crowns were fabricated and were subjected under universal force testing machine. All the results were recorded in Microsoft excel sheet and were analyzed by SPSS software. Mean tensile bond strength of group C specimens was 49.1 Kg while mean tensile strength of Group 2 specimens was 47.1 Kg respectively. While comparing statistically, non-significant results were obtained. Application of desensitizing agents may be designated during fabrication of crowns as it will not affect the retentive ability of the luting cements.
Contemporary clinical dentistry, 2015
Desensitizers are used to reduce dentin hypersensitivity. They affect the surface texture of prepared dentin and may alter the retention of fixed restorations. The aim was to evaluate the effect of dentin desensitizers on the retention of complete cast metal crowns luted with glass ionomer cement. Fifty freshly extracted human premolars were subjected to standardized tooth preparation (20° total convergence, 4 mm axial height) with a computer numerically controlled machine. Individual cast metal crowns were fabricated from a base metal alloy. Dentin desensitizers included none (control), a glutaraldehyde (GLU) based primer (Gluma desensitizer), casein phosphopeptide (CPP)-amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP) (GC Mousse), erbium, chromium: YSGG laser (Waterlase MD Turbo, Biolase) and Pro-Argin (Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief desensitizing polishing paste). After desensitization, crowns were luted with glass ionomer cement and kept for 48 h at 37°C in 100% relative humidity. The samples we...
The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 2017
Background: Luting agents used to fix artificial prostheses, such as fixed partial denture (FPD) to tooth are basically viscous in nature and show chemical reaction for fixation. Postcementation hypersensitivity is a frequent complaint of patients. The present study was conducted to compare postcementation hypersensitivity with zinc phosphate and self-adhesive resin in complete coverage crown. Materials and methods: This study included 30 patients in which 60 porcelein fused to metal crowns was placed. Two metal crowns were placed in each patient in nonantagonistic contralateral quadrants. First crown was cemented with zinc phosphate cement, while the other was cemented with self-adhesive resin. Hypersensitivity was evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS) score and by clinical test. For clinical evaluation of sensitivity, hot and cold water was applied to the cervical margin of restoration for 5 seconds and response was recorded. Results: This study consisted of 30 patients in which 60 crowns were given. There was no statistical difference in VAS score of mastication in zinc phosphate cement recorded at baseline, 1 week, 4 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years (p > 0.05). Cold response also did not show a significant difference at six time points. Warm response showed slight decrease in subsequent time points but was nonsignificant (p > 0.05). Similarly, with selfadhesive resin cement, VAS score during mastication, hot and cold response was statistically nonsignificant (p > 0.05).
World Journal of Dentistry
Aim and objective: The prevalence of dentinal hypersensitivity after tooth preparation is high and there is a need to explore the usage of contemporary agents in prosthodontics for this purpose. Therefore, the present study aims to evaluate the retention of fabricated copings on prepared teeth coated with freshly prepared arginine-calcium carbonate-fluoride and casein phosphopeptide (CPP)-amorphous calcium phosphate-fluoride desensitizing agents. Materials and methods: Forty-five extracted premolar teeth were mounted in autopolymerizing acrylic resin and prepared for complete cast metal copings following the standardized protocol. These preparations were randomly divided into three groups for the application of desensitizing agent: arginine based, CPP based, and control (without any agent). Each group was further subdivided into three and luted using either glass ionomer (GIC), resin modified glass ionomer (RMGIC), or resin cement. All these specimens were subjected to tensile bond strength evaluation using a universal testing machine. Results: The mean bond strengths (in Newtons) in the control group were 308.
Influence of preparation height and luting agent type on crown retention in molars
Brazilian Journal of …, 2010
Aim: Mechanical characteristics of the preparation along with luting agent are significant elements on the maintenance of fixed prostheses. This study aimed at assessing the retention of metal complete crowns luted with two different luting agents under different preparation height. Methods: Forty human third molars were selected and prepared to receive total crowns, and were randomly divided in 4 groups: (1) 5-mm preparation height (PH) and RelyX U100 self-adhesive resin cement (SA); (2) 5-mm PH and zinc phosphate (ZP); (3) 3-mm PH and SA; and (4) 3-mm PH and ZP. Crowns were cast in nickel-chromium alloy. The tensile strength was tested in a universal testing machine. Results: Mean tensile strength values to crown displacement (kgf) and standard deviation were 39.6 (13.0) for group 1; 16.9 (8.1) for group 2; 32.2 (7.9) for group 3; and 10.6 (3.2) for group 4. Overall, the crowns cemented with SA presented significantly higher mean tensile strength values than ZP, and the 5-mm PH presented significantly higher mean tensile strength values than 3-mm PH. Conclusions: The self-adhesive resin cement and higher preparation height improved crown retention.
Dental Materials, 2008
Objectives. To evaluate the effect of dentin and/or metal surface treatments on retention of cast crowns cemented to preparations with compromised retention. Methods. Cast crowns (n = 105) were fabricated on extracted molars prepared to 40 • convergence and standard height. 60 teeth were randomly divided into: (A) cemented with zinc phosphate cement; (B-D) cemented with resin cement (Compolute, 3M) with either no surface treatment (B), dentin etched and bonded (EBS multi, 3M) (C), or dentin etched and bonded, and metal tribochemically treated (Co-Jet, 3M) (D); 45 teeth were randomly divided and crowns cemented with another resin cement (Rely-X Arc, 3M) with either no surface treatment (E), dentin etched and bonded (Single Bond, 3M) (F), or dentin etched and bonded and metal tribochemically treated (G). Teeth were stored in 100% humidity for 3 months and thermocycled 5000 cycles. Crowns were dislodged from the preparations and retention (MPa) was calculated. Results. Group D showed significantly higher retention (3.52 ± 1.3 MPa) compared to Group C (2.26 ± 0.9 MPa), Group B (0.85 ± 0.4 MPa), and Group A (1.22 ± 0.4 MPa). Group G exhibited significantly higher retention (5.4 ± 1.4 MPa) compared to F (2.6 ± 1.2 MPa) and E (2.0 ± 0.6 MPa). Higher retention corresponded with more cohesive cement type of failure. Significance. Cast crowns with compromised retention cemented by resin cement should undergo combined tribochemical metal treatment and dentin bonding. The crucial link is the interaction of different brands of resin cements with the metal tribochemically treated.
Journal of international oral health : JIOH, 2015
Complete cast crowns are good alternatives and have best longevity for the restoration of damaged posterior teeth. Occasionally, a crown with clinically acceptable margins, preparation design, and occlusion becomes loose. Providers often debate whether such a crown can be successfully recemented with any degree of confidence that it will not be dislodged under normal masticatory function. It has been documented that resistance form increases by placing grooves opposing each other in a crown and tooth; cements also have a role to play in retention of crowns. To determine whether the addition of horizontal groove in the internal surface of the crown and/or tooth preparation will increase retention of the crowns, without remaking them and achieving better retention with cements. A total of 80 extracted human mandibular molars were taken and standard preparation was done. After the crowns were ready, the groove was made in the internal surface of the crown and on the tooth, which were c...