Evaluation of Bond Strength and Dentinal Tubule Penetration of the Post Luting Cements

Yıl 2018, Sayı: 3, 167 - 175, 01.12.2018

Yelda Paltun Sis Darendeliler Yaman

https://doi.org/10.21306/jids.2018.251

Öz

Aim: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of residual endodontic sealers on the adhesion of post luting cements. For hence, dentinal tubule penetration and bonding ability of three different self-adhesive resin cements was compared. Panavia SA; Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan. Relyx U200; 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany. Maxcem Elite; Kerr, CA, USA Material and Method: 180 mandibular second premolar teeth roots were used. 45 roots which were instrumented and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer which were labeled with 0.1% fluorescein dye. Forty-five roots were only instrumented with ProTaper, but left not-filled. The teeth were divided into two main groups: root canal filling FR and no root canal filling NFR . Then, these roots were cemented with three different self-adhesive resin cements.The specimens were divided into 6 groups.Group 1: Filled root FR / Panavia SA Group 2: Not-filled root NFR / Panavia SA; Group 3:FR/RelyX U200Group 4: NFT/RelyX U200Group 5: FR/Maxcem EliteGroup 6: NFR/Maxcem Elite. Before the insertion of the posts, cement was labeled with Rhodamin B. After cementation process of the fiber posts, the specimens were cross sectioned and the slices were submitted to the push-out test and dentin tubule penetration evaluation of the cements using confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results: FR/Maxcem Elite cement group presented the lowest bond strength value to dentin in the cervical third P < .05 . The dentinal tubule penetration area was higher in the NFR specimens compared to the FR in the Panavia SA and Rely X U 200 groups p=0.024, p=0.047 . Panavia SA group yielded the highest dentinal tubule penetration percentage compared to the other groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the three cements regarding penetration depth p>0.05 . Conclusion: The NFR groups showed better dentin tubule penetration values than FR groups

Anahtar Kelimeler

Confocal Laser, Scanning Microscopy, Dental Bonding, Resin cements

Post Yapıştırma Simanlarının Bağlanma Dayanımı ve Dentin Tübül Penetrasyonun Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, rezidüel kök kanal patının post yapıştırma simanlarının adezyonu üzerindeki etkisini araştırmaktır. Bu amaçla post yapıştırılmasında kullanılan üç farklı self adeziv rezin simanın Panavia SA; Kuraray, Japonya. Relyx U200; 3M ESPE, Almanya. Maxcem Elite; Kerr, ABD dentin tübül penetrasyonu ve push out testi yapılarak dentine bağlanma yeteneği karşılaştırılmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: 180 adet alt çene küçük azı diş kökü kullanıldı. 45 kök enstrümante edildi ve % 0,1 fluoesein boya ile etiketlenmiş AH Plus ve gutta perka ile dolduruldu. 45 adet kök ProTaper Universal ile prepare edildi. Dişler öncelikle kanal dolgusu yapılan KD+ ve kanal dolgusu yapılmayan KD- diye 2 ana gruba ayrıldı. Daha sonra bu köklere üç farklı self adeziv rezin siman ile post uygulandı. Örnekler 6 gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1: Kanal Dolgusu yapılan KD+ / Panavia SA rezin siman Grup 2:Kanal Dolgusu yapılmayan KD- / Panavia SA rezin siman Grup 3: KD+/ RelyX U200 rezin siman Grup 4: KD-/ RelyX U200 rezin siman Grup 5: KD+/ Maxcem Elite rezin siman Grup 6: KD-/ Maxcem Elite rezin siman Postların yerleştirilmesinden önce simanlar Rhodamin B ile boyandı. Fiber postların simantasyon işleminden sonra, örnekler kesitlere ayrıldı ve elde edilen kesitlere push-out testi uygulandı ve simanların dentin tübül penetrasyon değerlendirmesi için de konfokal lazer tarama mikroskobu kullanıldı. Bulgular: Push out testi değerlendirildiğinde gruplar içinde sadece KD+/ Maxcem Elite grubu servikal bölgede en düşük bağlanma değerlerini gösterdi p 0.05 . Sonuç: KD- grup, KD+ gruba göre daha iyi dentin tübül penetrasyon değerleri gösterdi.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Konfokal Lazer, Tarama Mikroskobu, Dental Bağlanma, Rezin simanlar.

Kaynakça

• 1. Pegoretti A, Fambri L, Zappini G, Bianchetti M. Finite element analysis of a glass fibre reinforced composite endodontic post. Biomaterials 2002;23:2667-2682.
• 2. Reis KR, Spyrides GM, Oliveira JA, Jnoub AA, Dias KR, Bonfantes G. Effect of cement type and water storage time on the push-out bond strength of a glass fiber post. Braz Dent J 2011;22:359-364.
• 3. Bouillaguet S, Troesch S, Wataha JC, Krejci I, Meyer JM, Pashley DH. Microtensile bond strength between adhesive cements and root canal dentin. Dent Mater 2003;19:199-205.
• 4. Stewart GP, Jain P, Hodges J. Shear bond strength of resin cements to both ceramic and dentin. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:277-284.
• 5. Mak YF, Lai SC, Cheung GS, Chan AW, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Micro-tensile bond testing of resin cements to dentin and an indirect resin composite. Dent Mater 2002;18:609-621.
• 6. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding: Effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 2000;25:324-330.
• 7. Han L, Okamoto A, Fukushima M, Okiji T. Evaluation of physical properties and surface degradation of self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater J 2007;26:906-914.
• 8. Bitter K, Paris S, Pfuertner C, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM. Morphological and bond strength evaluation of different resin cements to root dentin. Eur J Oral Sci 2009;117:326- 333.
• 9. Faria e Silva AL, Casselli DS, Ambrosano GM, Martins LR. Effect of the adhesive application mode and fiber post translucency on the push-out bond strength to dentin. J Endod 2007;33:1078-1081.
• 10. Marciano M, Ordinola-Zapata R, Cavalini Cavenago B, del Carpio Perochena A, Monteiro Bramante C, Gomes de Moraes I, Brandão Garcia R, Gagliardi Minotti P, Hungaro Duarte M. The use of confocal laser scanning microscopy in endodontic research: Sealer/dentin interfaces. Microscopy: Science, technology, applications and education. Formatex Microscopy Series, 2010; 23: 566-570.
• 11. Bitter K, Hambarayan A, Neumann K, Blunck U, Sterzenbach G. Various irrigation protocols for final rinse to improve bond strengths of fiber posts inside the root canal. Eur J Oral Sci 2013; 121: 349-354.
• 12. Bitter K, Paris S, Mueller J, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM. Correlation of scanning electron and confocal laser scanning microscopic analyses for visualization of dentin/ adhesive interfaces in the root canal. J Adhes Dent 2009;11: 7-14.
• 13. Demiryürek EO, Külünk S, Yüksel G, Saraç D, Bulucu B. Effects of three canal sealers on bond strength of a fiber post. J Endod 2010;36:497-501.
• 14. Burns DR, Moon PC, Webster NP, Burns DA. Effect of endodontic sealers on dowels luted with resin cement. J Prosthodont 2000;9:137-41.
• 15. Kokkas AB, Boutsioukis AC, Vassiliadis LP, Stavrianos CK. The influence of the smear layer on dentinal tubule penetration depth by three different root canal sealers: An in vitro study. J Endod 2004;30:100-102.
• 16. Ganss C, Jung M. Effect of eugenol-containing temporary cements on bond strength of composite to dentin. Oper Dent 1998;23:55-62.
• 17. Tjan AH, Nemetz H. Effect of eugenol-containing endodontic sealer on retention of prefabricated posts luted with an adhesive composite resin cement. Quintessence Int 1992;23:839-844.
• 18. Muniz L, Mathias P. The influence of sodium hypochlorite and root canal sealers on post retention in different dentin regions. Oper Dent 2005;30: 533-539.
• 19. Boone KJ, Murchison DF, Schjndler WG, Walker WA 3rd. Post retention: The effect of sequence of post-space preparation, cementation time, and different sealers. J Endod 2001;27:768-771.
• 20. Teixeira CS, Pasternak-Junior B, Borges AH, Paulino SM, Sousa-Neto MD. Influence of endodontic sealers on the bond strength of carbon fiber posts. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008; 84: 430-435.
• 21. Mannocci F, Pilecki P, Bertelli E, Watson TF. Density of dentinal tubules affects the tensile strength of root dentin. Dent Mater 2004;20:293-296.
• 22. Mjör IA, Smith MR, Ferrari M, Mannocci F. The structure of dentine in the apical region of human teeth. Int Endod J 2001;34:346-353.
• 23. Baldea B, Furtos G, Antal M, Nagy K, Popescu D, Nica L. Push-out bond strength and SEM analysis of two selfadhesive resin cements: An in vitro study. J Dent Sci 2013;8: 296-305
• 24. Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, De Munck J, Peumans M, Yoshida Y, Poitevin A, Coutinho E, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 2007; 28: 3757-3785.
• 25. Lee SE, Bae JH, Choi JW, Jeon YC, Jeong CM, Yoon MJ, Huh JB. Comparative shear-bond strength of six dental selfadhesive resin cements to zirconia. Materials 2015;8:3306- 3315.
• 26. Aguiar TR, Andre CB, Arrais CAG, Bedran-Russo AK, Giannini M. Micromorphology of resin-dentin interfaces using self-adhesive and conventional resin cements: A confocal laser and scanning electron microscope analysis. Int J Adhes Adhes 2012; 38: 69-74.
• 27. Hitz T, Stawarczyk B, Fischer J, Hämmerle CH, Sailer I. Are self-adhesive resin cements a valid alternative to conventional resin cements? A laboratory study of the long-term bond strength. Dent Mater 2012;28:1183-1190.
• 28. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, Hikita K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an autoadhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 2004; 20: 963-971.
• 29. Burgess JO, Ghuman T, Cakir D. Self-adhesıve resın cements. J Esthet Restor Dent 2010;22:412-419.
• 30. Stona P, Borges GA, Montes MA, Júnior LH, Weber JB, Spohr AM. Effect of polyacrylic acid on the interface and bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2013;15: 221-227.
• 31. D’Alpino PH, Pereira JC, Svizero NR, Rueggeberg FA, Pashley DH. Factors affecting use of fluorescent agents in identification of resin-based polymers. J Adhes Dent 2006; 8: 285-292.
• 32. Schüpbach P, Krejci I, Lutz F. Dentin bonding: Effect of tubule orientation on hybrid-layer formation. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105:344-352.
• 33. Ferrari M, Davidson CL. In vivo resin-dentin interdiffusion and tag formation with lateral branches of two adhesive systems. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:250-253.