STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The introduction of resin-modified glass ionomer cements has expanded the choices of luting cements available to the clinician; however, few independent studies are available on the fracture toughness of the currently available resin-modified glass ionomer luting agents compared with the composite cements. PURPOSE: This investigation evaluated the relative fracture toughness (K(IC)) of 3 composite luting cements (Panavia 21, Enforce, and C&B Metabond), 3 resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements (Advance, Vitremer Luting, and Fuji Duet), and a conventional glass ionomer luting cement (Ketac-Cem) at 24-hour and 7-day storage times. MATERIAL AND METHODS: K(IC) was determined by preparing minicompact test specimens (n = 8) with introduced precracks. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C + 2 degrees C until testing. Testing was performed on an Instron testing machine at a displacement rate of 0.5 mm/min. RESULTS: ANOVA (P <.001) and REGW Multiple Range Test (P <.05) demonstrated significant differences among several of the cements tested. The mean fracture toughness values of C&B Metabond at 24 hours and Enforce at both 24 hours and 7 days were significantly greater than use any of the other cements tested. CONCLUSION: The resin-modified glass ionomer cements exhibited improved fracture toughness when compared with the conventional glass ionomer; however, they were still inferior to Enforce and C&B Metabond composite cements.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The introduction of resin-modified glass ionomer cements has expanded the choices of luting cements available to the clinician; however, few independent studies are available on the fracture toughness of the currently available resin-modified glass ionomer luting agents compared with the composite cements. PURPOSE: This investigation evaluated the relative fracture toughness (K(IC)) of 3 composite luting cements (Panavia 21, Enforce, and C&B Metabond), 3 resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements (Advance, Vitremer Luting, and Fuji Duet), and a conventional glass ionomer luting cement (Ketac-Cem) at 24-hour and 7-day storage times. MATERIAL AND METHODS: K(IC) was determined by preparing minicompact test specimens (n = 8) with introduced precracks. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C + 2 degrees C until testing. Testing was performed on an Instron testing machine at a displacement rate of 0.5 mm/min. RESULTS: ANOVA (P <.001) and REGW Multiple Range Test (P <.05) demonstrated significant differences among several of the cements tested. The mean fracture toughness values of C&B Metabond at 24 hours and Enforce at both 24 hours and 7 days were significantly greater than use any of the other cements tested. CONCLUSION: The resin-modified glass ionomer cements exhibited improved fracture toughness when compared with the conventional glass ionomer; however, they were still inferior to Enforce and C&B Metabond composite cements.
Authors: Jefferson Ricardo Pereira; Ricardo Abreu da Rosa; Marcus Vinícius Reis Só; Daniele Afonso; Milton Carlos Kuga; Heitor Marques Honório; Accácio Lins do Valle; Hugo Alberto Vidotti Journal: J Appl Oral Sci Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 2.698