Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength between Resin Composites and Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement in Class II Restorative Technique—An In Vitro Study
Afreen Bilgrami,Afsheen Maqsood,Mohammad Khursheed Alam,Naseer Ahmed,Mohammed Mustafa,Ali Robaian Alqahtani,Abdullah Alshehri,Abdullah Ali Alqahtani,Shahad Alghannam
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15124293
IF: 3.4
2022-06-18
Materials
Abstract:The success of dental restorations depends mainly on the ability to bond to other filling materials and tooth substances, in order to resist the multitude of forces acting on the bond within the oral cavity. Although the shortcomings of composite resins have been significantly reduced over the past three decades, microleakage due to shrinkage under masticatory loads is unavoidable. In order to overcome such problems, two materials laminated with matched properties can be used to achieve optimum results. The sandwich technique is an approach in which dentine is replaced by glass ionomer cement (GIC), and enamel is replaced by composite resin. In the past, numerous materials have been proposed with adequate properties to be used in this manner, but the results are conflicting in terms of bonding to the various forms of GIC, and the appearance of microcracks or gap formation during functional loading. This study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) and mode of failure between the following core materials: composite resins (CR) (Methacrylate Z350TM, Ceram XTM, and SpectrumTM) with a base material of glass ionomer cement (GIC, Ketac MolarTM). Eight samples were made with the help of polytetrafluoroethylene sheets (TEFLON, Wilmington, DE, USA). Each sheet consisted of holes which were 4 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness. The combination of materials was sandwiched. The samples were stored in distilled water and then placed in an incubator for 24 h in order to ensure complete polymerization. The samples were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5–55 °C/ 30 s. Following thermocycling, SBS testing was performed using a universal testing machine. Additionally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed on representative samples for the bond failure analysis between GIC and the composite resins. The Ceram-XTM nanocomposite showed significantly higher bond strength than Methacrylate Z350TM or SpectrumTM (p = 0.002). The Methacrylate Z350TM and the SpectrumTM composite specimens demonstrated a similar SBS (p = 0.281). The SBS of the Ceram XTM to GIC was the highest compared to Methacrylate Z350TM and SpectrumTM. Therefore Ceram XTM may produce a better bond with GIC, and may protect teeth against recurrent caries and failure of the restoration. Methacrylate Z350TM is comparable to SpectrumTM CR and can be used as an alternative. A combination of adhesive and mixed failure was observed in Methacrylate Z350TM CR and GIC, while adhesive failure was predominantly found in both Ceram XTM and SpectrumTM with GIC restorations.
materials science, multidisciplinary,chemistry, physical,physics, applied, condensed matter,metallurgy & metallurgical engineering