Dayana Da Silva Gonçalves1, María Cura1, Laura Ceballos1, Mª Victoria Fuentes2. 1. Department of Stomatology and Nursing. Health Sciences Faculty, Rey Juan Carlos University, Avda. Atenas s/n, 28922, Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain. 2. Department of Stomatology and Nursing. Health Sciences Faculty, Rey Juan Carlos University, Avda. Atenas s/n, 28922, Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain. victoria.fuentes@urjc.es.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the influence of proximal box elevation on microtensile bond strength (mTBS) of composite inlays to the proximal box floor, using either a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Twenty-five human molars were selected, and a class II OM (inlay) cavity preparation was performed in each tooth. Cavities were randomly assigned into four experimental groups, according to the location of the proximal cervical margin (located 1 mm below cementoenamel junction (CEJ), or with proximal box elevation with composite resin) and the resin cement used for luting (a total-etch resin cement RelyX ARC or a self-adhesive resin cement G-Cem). After 1-week water storage, samples were subjected to mTBS test. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Kruskal-Wallis revealed statistically significant differences among experimental groups (p = 0.007). Both resin cements showed similar bond strength values when cervical margin was located below CEJ. The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength of composite inlays for both resin cements. However, only for G-Cem was this improvement statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength attained by G-Cem resin cement. For RelyX ARC, the position of the cervical margin did not affect composite inlays bond strength. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Proximal box elevation does not decline bond strength of composite inlays to the proximal floor when a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement is used.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the influence of proximal box elevation on microtensile bond strength (mTBS) of composite inlays to the proximal box floor, using either a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five human molars were selected, and a class II OM (inlay) cavity preparation was performed in each tooth. Cavities were randomly assigned into four experimental groups, according to the location of the proximal cervical margin (located 1 mm below cementoenamel junction (CEJ), or with proximal box elevation with composite resin) and the resin cement used for luting (a total-etch resin cement RelyX ARC or a self-adhesive resin cement G-Cem). After 1-week water storage, samples were subjected to mTBS test. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Kruskal-Wallis revealed statistically significant differences among experimental groups (p = 0.007). Both resin cements showed similar bond strength values when cervical margin was located below CEJ. The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength of composite inlays for both resin cements. However, only for G-Cem was this improvement statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength attained by G-Cem resin cement. For RelyX ARC, the position of the cervical margin did not affect composite inlays bond strength. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Proximal box elevation does not decline bond strength of composite inlays to the proximal floor when a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement is used.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bond strength; Composite inlays; Proximal box elevation; Resin cement
Authors: Giovanni Tommaso Rocca; Ladislav Gregor; Maria Jose Sandoval; Ivo Krejci; Didier Dietschi Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Amerigo Cantoro; Cecilia Goracci; Carlos Augusto Carvalho; Ivanovic Coniglio; Marco Ferrari Journal: J Dent Date: 2009-03-31 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Matthias J Roggendorf; Norbert Krämer; Christoph Dippold; Vera E Vosen; Michael Naumann; Anahita Jablonski-Momeni; Roland Frankenberger Journal: J Dent Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 4.379