İKİ FARKLI REZİN SİMANIN DENTİN YÜZEYİNE BAĞLANMA DAYANIKLIĞINA GEÇİCİ SİMAN UZAKLAŞTIRMA YÖNTEMLERİNİN ETKİSİ

Year 2020, Volume: 30 Issue: 4, 639 - 644, 15.10.2020

Zeynep Yeşil Duymuş Murat Alkurt Gülşah Hediye Akyıldız

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.782443

Abstract

Amaç: Bu in vitro çalışma iki farklı rezin simanın dentin yüzeyine bağlanma dayanıklılığına geçici siman (Cavex) uzaklaştırma yöntemlerinin etkisinin incelenmesi amacıyla yapıldı.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmada 40 adet yeni çekilmiş insan molar dişlerinin oklüzal yüzeyleri dentin yüzeyi açığa çıkıncıya kadar prepare edildi. Deney grubunu oluşturan dişlerin her biri 15 mm çap ve 10 mm yüksekliğindeki polimerik tüplere oklüzal yüzeyleri paralelometrenin dikey eksenine dik olacak şekilde yerleştirildi ve dişler otopolimerizan şeffaf akrilik silindir bloklar içerisine gömüldü. Bir grup (N=5) örnek kontrol grubu olarak ayrıldıktan sonra diğer örnek yüzeylerine çapları 3 mm olan kalıplar içerisinde üretici firmanın talimatlarına uygun olarak öjenolsüz geçici siman yerleştirildi. 37°C’de distile suda 7 gün süreyle bekletilen örneklerin yüzeyindeki siman artıkları 10 sn süreyle keskin bir el aleti, air-flow ve fosforik asit olmak üzere üç farklı teknikle uzaklaştırıldı. Daha sonra tüm dentin yüzeylerine 5 N luk yük altında, Panavia F2.0 ve Panavia SA rezin siman 3 mm lik kalıplar ile yapıştırıldı. Kesme tipi (shear bond strength) bağlanma dayanıklılıkları Universal test makinası kullanılarak dakikada 1.0 mm başlık hızı ile ölçüldü. Bağlanma değerleri ve standart sapmaları hesaplandı. Elde edilen sonuçlar varyans analizi ve Tukey çoklu karşılaştırma ve t testi ile değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Temizleme yöntemleri (p<0.05) ve siman türünün anlamlı (p<0.001) olduğu, interaksiyonların ise anlamlı olmadığı (p>0.05) istatistiksel olarak saptandı.
Tartışma: Adeziv simanlarla simantasyon yapılmadan önce, geçici simanların tam olarak temizlenmesi gerekir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Geçici siman, rezin siman, dentine bağlanma, temizleme yöntemleri

The Effect of Temporary Cementation Removal Methods on Bonding Strength of Two Different Resin Cements on the Dentine Surface
ABSTRACT
Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was carried out to investigate the effect of temporary cements (Cavex) removal methods on the bond strength of two different resin cements to the dentin surface.
Material and Methods: In the study, 40 fresh extracted human molar teeth were prepared until exposed the dentin surface. Each of the teeth forming the experimental group was placed into polymeric tubes of 15 mm diameter and 10 mm height and their occlusal surfaces were placed perpendicular to the vertical axis of the parallelometer and the teeth were embedded in autopolymerizing transparent acrylic cylinder blocks.
After separating a group (N=5) as the sample control group, the non-eugenic temporary cement was placed in the molds with diameters 3 mm on the other sample surfaces in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The cement residues on the surface of the samples which were kept in distilled water at 37 ° C for 7 days were removed with three different techniques as a sharp hand tool, air-flow and phosphoric acid for 10 sec. Then, under 5 N load on all dentin surfaces, Panavia F2.0 and Panavia SA resin cements were bonded with 3 mm molds. Resistance to shear bond strength bonding was measured using a universal test machine with a head speed of 1.0 mm per minute. Attachment values and standard deviations were calculated. The results were evaluated by variance analysis and Tukey multiple comparison and t test.
Results: The removal methods (p<0.05) and cement type (p<0.001) were significant effect on bonding strength of dentin surface. However, the interaction of between removal methods and cement type not significant effect on bonding strength (p>0.05).
Conclusion: Before the adhesive cementation, the temporary cements must be thoroughly cleaned.
Keywords: Temporary cement, resin cement, dentin binding, cleaning methods

Keywords

Geçici siman, rezin siman, dentine bağlanma

References

• 1. Köroğlu A, Ekren O, Kurtoğlu C. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2012;22: 205-216.
• 2. Van Noort R. Introduction to Dental Materials. 2nd ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2002. p. 257-278.
• 3. Stamatacos C, Simon JF. Cementation of indirect restorations: an overview of resin cements. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2013; Jan;34(1):42-4, 46.
• 4. Powers JM, Sakaguchi RL. Craig's Restorative Dental Materials. 12th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Publishing; 2006. p. 479-511.
• 5. Anusavice KJ. Phillips’ science of dental materials. 10th ed., Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co.; 1996.
• 6. Ayad MF, Rosenstiel SF, & Hassan MM. Surface roughness of dentin after tooth preparation with different rotary instrumentation. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:122-128.
• 7. Grasso CA, Caluori DM, Goldstein GR, & Hittelman E. In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:437-441.
• 8. Jung M, Ganss C, Senger S. Effect of eugenol-containing temporary cements on bond strength of composite to enamel. Oper Dent 1998;23: 63-8.
• 9. Ganss C, Jung M. Effect of eugenol-containing temporary cements on bond strength of composite to dentin. Oper Dent 1998; 23: 55-62.
• 10. Sarac¸ D, Bulucu B, Sarac¸ YS, & Kulunk S. The effect of dentin-cleaning agents on resin cement bond strength to dentin. J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:751-758.
• 11. Rosenstiel SF LM, Fugimoto J.Contemporary Fixed Prosthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis, Mosby, 2004; 909, 910, 913.
• 12. Mosharraf R. A simple method for cleaning zinc oxide-eugenol provisional cement residues from the intaglio surface of casting restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:200.
• 13. Watanabe EK, Yamashita A, Imai M, Yatani H, Suzuki K. Temporary cement remnants as an adhesion inhibiting factor in the interface between resin cements and bovine dentin. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:440–52.
• 14. Terata R. Characterization of enamel and dentin surfacesafter removal of temporary cement – study on removal of temporary cement. Dent Mater J 1993;12:18–28.
• 15. Xie J, Powers JM, McGuckin RS. In vitro bond strength of two adhesives to enamel and dentin under normal and contaminated conditions. Dent Mater 1993;9:295–9.
• 16. Baier RE. Principles of adhesion. Oper Dent 1992;(Suppl. 5):1–9.
• 17. Woody TL, Davis RD. The effect of eugenol-containing and eugenol-free temporary cements on microleakage in resin bonded restorations. Oper Dent 1992;175-180.
• 18. Terata R, Nakashima K, Obara M, Kubota M. Characterization of enamel and dentin surfaces after removal of temporary cement- Effect of temporary cement on tensile bond strength of resin luting cement. Dent Mater J 1994;148-154.
• 19. Watanabe EK, Yamashita A, Imai M, Yatani H, Suzuki K. Temporary cement remnants as an adhesion inhibiting factor in the interface between resin cements and bovine dentin. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10, 440-452.
• 20. Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Morphological aspects of the resin–dentin interdiffusion zone with different dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res 1992;71:1530–40.
• 21. Eick JD, Gwinnett AJ, Pashley DH, Robinson SJ. Current concepts on adhesion to dentin. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1997;8:306–35.
• 22. Irie M, Suzuki K, Watts DC. Immediate performance of selfetching versus system adhesives with multiple lightactivated restoratives. Dent Mater 2004;20:873–80.
• 23. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent 1997;25:355–72.
• 24. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Aggressiveness of contemporary selfetching systems I: depth of penetration beyond dentin smear layers. Dent Mater 2001;17:296–308.
• 25. Terata R, Nakashima K, Kubota M. Effect of temporary materials on bond strength of resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements to teeth. Am J Dent. 2000;13:209-11.
• 26. Kanakuri K, Kawamoto Y, Kakehashi Y, Matsumura H. Influence of temporary cements on bond strength between resin-based luting agents and dentin. Am J Dent 2006;19:101-5.
• 27. Woody TL, Davis RD. The effect of eugenol-containing and eugenol-free temporary cements on microleakage in resin bonded restorations. Oper Dent 1992;17:175-80.
• 28. Terata R, Nakashima K, Obara M, Kubota M. Characterization of enamel and dentin surfaces after removal of temporary cement--effect of temporary cement on tensile bond strength of resin luting cement. Dent Mater J 1994;13:148-54.
• 29. Watanabe EK, Yamashita A, Imai M, Yatani H, Suzuki K. Temporary cement remnants as an adhesion inhibiting factor in the interface between resin cements and bovine dentin. Int J Prosthodont. 1997;10:440-52.
• 30. Ersu B, Tulunoğlu İ, Aktaş G, Şüküroğlu E, Karabulut E. İki Farklı Rezin Simanın Dentin ve Metal Yüzeyine Bağlanma Dayanıklılığına İki Geçici Siman Uzaklaştırma Yönteminin Etkisi. Hacettepe Diş Hek Fak Derg 2008; 32: 64-70.
• 31. Baier RE. Principles of adhesion. Oper Dent 1992;(Suppl. 5):1–9.
• 32. Woody TL, Davis RD. The effect of eugenol-containing and eugenol-free temporary cements on microleakage in resin bonded restorations. Oper Dent 1992;17, 175-180.
• 33. Watanabe EK, Yatani H, Ishikawa K, Suzuki K, Yamashita A. Pilot study of conditioner/primer effects on resin-dentin bonding after provisional cement contamination using SEM, energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy and bond strength evaluation measures. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83: 349-55.
• 34. Terata R. Characterization of enamel and dentin surfaces after removal of temporary cement-study on removal of temporary cement. Dent Mater J 1993; 12: 18-28.
• 35. Leirskar J, Nordbo H. The effect of zinc oxide-eugenol on the shear bond strength of commonly used bonding system. Endod Dent Travmatol 2000; 16: 265-68.
• 36. Terata R, Nakashima K, Kubota M. Effect of dentin treatment with citric acid/ferric chloride solutions on glass ionomer bond strength. Am J Dent 1998; 11: 33-5.
• 37. Schwartz R, Davis R, Hilton TJ. Effect of temporary cements on the bond strength of a resin cement. Am J Dent 1992;5:147-50.
• 38. Paul SJ, Schärer P. Effect of provisional cements on the bond strength of various adhesive bonding systems on dentine. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24:8-14.
• 39. Yap AU, Shah KC, Loh ET, Sim SS, Tan CC. Influence of eugenol-containing temporary restorations on bond strength of composite to dentin. Oper Dent. 2001;26:556-61.
• 40. Lee J, Jang KT, Kim JW, Lee SH, Hahn SH, Kim CC. Effect of ultrasonic vibration on dentin bond strength and resin infiltration. Am J Dent 2003;16:404-8.
• 41. Fonseca RB, Martins LR, Quagliatto PS, Soares CJ. Influence of provisional cements on ultimate bond strength of indirect composite restorations to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:225-30.
• 42. Nikaido T, Yamada T, Koh Y, Burrow MF, Takatsu T. Effect of air-powder polishing on adhesion of bonding systems to tooth substrates. Dent Mater 1995;11:258-64.
• 43. Nishimura K, Nikaido T, Foxton RM, Tagami J.Effect of air-powder polishing on dentin adhesion of a self-etching primer bonding system. Dent Mater J 2005;24:59-65.
• 44. Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Tay FR, Taschner M, Nikolaenko SA. The effect of different air- polishing powders on dentin bonding. J Adhes Dent 2007;9:381-9.
• 45. Grasso CA, Caluori DM, Goldstein GR, Hittelman E. In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 437-41.
• 46. Bachmann M, Paul SJ, Lüthy H, Scharer P. Effect of cleansing dentine with soap and pumice on shear bond strength of dentine-bonding agents. J Oral Rehabil 1997; 24: 433-8.
• 47. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. The effects of tooth preparation cleansing protocols on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to contaminated dentin. Oper Dent 2008;33(5):556-63.
• 48. Santos MJMC, Bapoo H, Rizkalla AS, Santos Jr GC. Effect of dentin-cleaning techniques on the shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cement to dentin. Oper Dent 2011;36(5):512-20.
• 49. Januario ABD, Moura DMD, de Araujo AMM, Dal Piva AMO, Özcan M, Bottino MA, Souza RAO. Effect of temporary cement removal methods from human dentin on zirconia-dentin adhesion. J Adhes Scı Technol 2019;33(19),2112-27.