Evaluation of the Effect of Saliva Contamination on the Bond Strength of Resin Cements to Coronal Dentin

Bu makalenin ilk hali 20 Nisan 2026 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/add/article/1108164

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of saliva contamination on bond strength of different resin cements to coronal dentin. Method: Extracted carious-free 36 human molar teeth were selected and 1/3 occlusal triad were cut flat to get a dentin surface. Five different resin cements (Fujicem Evolve, RelyX U200, G-Cem Veneer, Panavia V5, Panavia F 2.0) were used. Teeth were divided into two subgroups according to artificial saliva contamination and six subgroups surface treatment. In each group, 15 sticks were obtained with a low-speed diamond saw and their bond strength was calculated as MPa by measuring with a microtensile bond strength tester. Data were analyzed with analyses of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test was performed to identify significant differences (p=0.05). Results: The lowest bond strength values obtained in Fujicem Evolve gruop (0.97 MPa) while, the highest bond strength value was recorded in the non-contaminated Panavia V5 gruop (23.39 MPa). The decrease bond strength values of the Fujicem Evolve, RelyX U 200 (Total Etch) and Panavia V5 groups as a result of saliva contamination was statistically significant. (p<0,05). Conclusion: This study shows that saliva contamination may affect the bond strength depends on types of resin cements. In addition, there may be differences in bond strength between resin cements.

Keywords

• Resin cement
• coronal dentin
• bond strength
• saliva contamination

Rezin Simanların Koronal Dentine Bağlanmasına Tükürük Kontaminasyonun Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi

Bu makalenin ilk hali 20 Nisan 2026 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/add/article/1108164

Düzeltme Notu

Yanlış PDF dosyası yüklenmişti

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı rezin simanların koronal dentine bağlanma dayanımlarında tükürük kontaminasyonunun etkisini incelemektir. Yöntem: Çürüksüz 36 adet insan molar dişi seçilmiş ve dişlerin 1/3 oklüzal üçlüsü kesilerek dentin yüzeyi açığa çıkarılmıştır. Çalışmada beş farklı rezin siman (Fujicem Evolve, RelyX U200, G-Cem Veneer, Panavia V5, Panavia F 2.0) kullanılmıştır. Dişler yapay tükürük kontaminasyonuna göre iki ve uygulama şekillerine göre altı alt gruba ayrılmıştır. Her grupta 15 adet çubuk hassas kesme cihazı ile elde edilmiş ve bağlanma dayanımları mikrogerilim bağlanma test cihazı ile ölçülerek MPa olarak hesaplanmıştır. Veriler varyans analizi (ANOVA) ile analiz edildi ve Tukey testi anlamlı farklılıkları tespit etmek için kullanıldı (p=0.05). Bulgular: En düşük bağlanma dayanımı tükürükle kontamine Fujicem Evolve grubnda (0,97 MPa) en yüksek bağlanma dayanım değerini ise kontamine edilmemiş Panavia V5 grubunda (23,39 MPa) bulunmuştur. Fujicem Evolve, RelyX U 200 (Total Etch) ve Panavia V5 grubunda tükürük kontaminasyonu sonucu bağlanma dayanım değerlerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir azalama tespit edilmiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: Tükürük kontaminasyonunun rezin simanlar için bağlanma dayanımında rezin simana bağlı olarak etkili olduğu ve rezin simanların kendi aralarında bağlanma dayanımları arasında farklılıklar olabileceği ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Rezin siman
• koronal dentin
• bağlanma dayanımı
• tükürük kontaminasyonu

Kaynakça

1. 1. Araoka D, Hosaka K, Nakajima M, Foxton R, Thanatvarakorn O, Prasansuttiporn T, et al. The strategies used for curing universal adhesives affect the micro-bond strength of resin cement used to lute indirect resin composites to human dentin. Dental Material Journal. 2018;37(3):506-14. Epub 20180227.
2. 2. Sekhri S, Mittal S, Garg S. Tensile bond strength of self adhesive resin cement after various surface treatment of enamel. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2016;10(1):ZC01.
3. 3. Chung C, Yiu C, King N, Hiraishi N, Tay F. Effect of saliva contamination on bond strength of resin luting cements to dentin. Journal of Dentistry. 2009;37(12):923-31.
4. 4. Amsler F, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A, Flury S. Bond strength of resin composite to dentin with different adhesive systems: Influence of relative humidity and application time. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2015;17(3):249-56.
5. 5. Aguiar T, Andre C, Arrais C, Bedran-Russo A, Giannini M. Micromorphology of resin–dentin interfaces using self-adhesive and conventional resin cements: A confocal laser and scanning electron microscope analysis. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives. 2012;38:69-74.
6. 6. Hiraishi N, Kitasako Y, Nikaido T, Nomura S, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Effect of artificial saliva contamination on pH value change and dentin bond strength. Dental Materials. 2003;19(5):429-34.
7. 7. Taskonak B, Sertgöz A. Shear bond strengths of saliva contaminatedone‐bottle'adhesives. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2002;29(6):559-64.
8. 8. Aykent F, Yondem I, Ozyesil AG, Gunal SK, Avunduk MC, Ozkan S. Effect of different finishing techniques for restorative materials on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2010;103(4):221-7.

9. 9. Hahnel S, Ionescu AC, Cazzaniga G, Ottobelli M, Brambilla E. Biofilm formation and release of fluoride from dental restorative materials in relation to their surface properties. Journal of Dentistry. 2017;60:14-24.
10. 10. El-Mowafy OM, Rubo MH. Influence of composite inlay/onlay thickness on hardening of dual-cured resin cements. Journal of Canadian Dental Association. 2000;66(3):147.
11. 11. Malament KA, Socransky SS. Survival of Dicor glass-ceramic dental restorations over 16 years. Part III: effect of luting agent and tooth or tooth-substitute core structure. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2001;86(5):511-9.
12. 12. Vargas MA, Bergeron C, Diaz-Arnold A. Cementing all-ceramic restorations: recommendations for success. Journal of American Dental Association. 2011;142 Suppl 2:20S-4S.
13. 13. Weiser F, Behr M. Self-adhesive resin cements: a clinical review. J Prosthodontics. 2015;24(2):100-8. Epub 20140709.
14. 14. Ferracane JL, Stansbury J, Burke FJT. Self‐adhesive resin cements–chemistry, properties and clinical considerations. Journal of oral Rehabilitation. 2011;38(4):295-314.
15. 15. Abo-Hamar SE, Hiller K-A, Jung H, Federlin M, Friedl K-H, Schmalz G. Bond strength of a new universal self-adhesive resin luting cement to dentin and enamel. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2005;9(3):161-7.
16. 16. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dental Materials. 2004;20(10):963-71.
17. 17. De Souza G, Braga RR, Cesar PF, Lopes GC. Correlation between clinical performance and degree of conversion of resin cements: a literature review. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2015;23(4):358-68.
18. 18. Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A, Flury S. Bonding of restorative materials to dentin with various luting agents. Operative Dentistry. 2011;36(3):266-73.
19. 19. Toman M, Toksavul S, Akin A. Bond strength of all-ceramics to tooth structure: using new luting systems. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2008;10(5):373-8.
20. 20. Mirmohammadi H, Aboushelib MN, Salameh Z, Feilzer AJ, Kleverlaan CJ. Innovations in bonding to zirconia based ceramics: Part III. Phosphate monomer resin cements. Dental Materials. 2010;26(8):786-92.
21. 21. Grégoire G, Joniot S, Guignes P, Millas A. Dentin permeability: self-etching and one-bottle dentin bonding systems. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2003;90(1):42-9.
22. 22. Güller F, Şimşek M, Fatma C, Yildiz E, Yildirim C. Bir adeziv sistemin kanama durdurucu ajanlarla kontamine edilen dentin yüzeyine bağlanma dayanımı. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. 2014;17(1):42-7.
23. 23. Hitmi L, Attal J-P, Degrange M. Influence of the time-point of salivary contamination on dentin shear bond strength of 3 dentin adhesive systems. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 1999;1(3).
24. 24. Suryakumari NB, Reddy PS, Surender L, Kiran R. In vitro evaluation of influence of salivary contamination on the dentin bond strength of one-bottle adhesive systems. Contemporary Clinical Dentistry. 2011;2(3):160.
25. 25. Fritz UB, Finger WJ, Stean H. Salivary contamination during bonding procedures with a one-bottle adhesive system. Quintessenc International. 1998;29(9).
26. 26. Kanca J, 3rd. One step bond strength to enamel and dentin. American Journal of Dentistry. 1997;10(1):5-8.
27. 27. Crisp R, Burke F. One-year clinical evaluation of compomer restorations placed in general practice. Quintessence International. 2000;31(3).