IJCRR - 5(3), February, 2013
Pages: 62-68
COMPARATIVE SHEAR BOND STRENGTH EVALUATION OF THREE TOOTH COLORED RESTORATIVE MATERIALS USED IN PRIMARY TEETH - AN IN VITRO STUDY
Author: K. Vimala Geetha, Eapen Thomas, Phani Babu
Category: Healthcare
[Download PDF]
Abstract:
The goal of research and development is to develop an ideal restorative material. The ideal restorative material would be identical to natural tooth structure, in strength adherence and appearance. Hence the aim of the study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of three recently evolved tooth colored restorative materials used in primary teeth dentine and verify, after SBS testing, the failure mode of the adhesive interface. Sixty extracted deciduous human molars with one of the proximal and occlusal surfaces free of caries were selected and randomly assigned into three groups according to the restorative material used. Teeth were sectioned parallel to occlusal surface to expose the mid coronal dentin of the non carious surface and the restorative materials were packed into a plastic straw (3 mm x 2 mm) covering the centre of flattened occlusal surface. SBS tests were performed and the obtained values were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Turkey tests (p<0.05). The failure mode analysis was performed with an Instron machine. Proportions were estimated and compared by using Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test (2-tailed) appropriately. From the results of the study, it may be concluded that the intra-group comparison showed, Group III (Admira) giving higher mean shear bond strength followed by group I (N 100). The lower bond strength is reported in-group II (Vitremer). The adhesive and cohesive modes of bond failures that are obtained in all three materials (N100, Vitremer, Admira) were not statistically significant.
Keywords: Deciduous teeth, shear bond strength, Vitremer, Ketac N 100, Ormocer.
Citation:
K. Vimala Geetha, Eapen Thomas, Phani Babu. COMPARATIVE SHEAR BOND STRENGTH EVALUATION OF THREE TOOTH COLORED RESTORATIVE MATERIALS USED IN PRIMARY TEETH - AN IN VITRO STUDY International Journal of Current Research and Review. 5(3), February, 62-68
References:
1. Hubel S, Mejare I. Conventional versus Resin Modified Glass Ionomer cement for class II restorations in primary molars. A 3 year clinical study. Int J Paediatr Dent 2003;13(1):2-8.
2. K.M.Y. Hse, S. K. Leung, S.H.Y. Wei. Resin Ionomer materials for children: A review. Australian Dental Journal 1999;44 (1):1-11.
3. Mc Carthy MF, Hondrum SO, Mechanical and bond strength properties of light-cured and chemically cured glass ionomer cements. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 1994 Feb;105(2):135-141.
4. Almuammar MF, Schulman A, Salama FS. Shear bond strength of six restorative materials. J ClinPediatr Dent. 2001; 25 (3):221-225.
5. SfondriniMF, Cacciafesta, Pistorio A, Sfondrini G. Effects of conventional and high- intensity light curing on enamel shear bond strength of composite resin and resin modified glass ionomer. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 2001;119(1):30-35.
6. Ajlouni R, Bishara SE, Soliman MM et al. The use of Ormocer as an alternative material for bonding orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod. 2005 Jan;75(1):106-8.
7. Camile S. Farah, Vergil G Orton, Stephen M. Collard. Shear bond strength of chemical and light cured glass ionomercements bonded to resin composities. Australian Dental Journal 1998; 43(2):81-86.
8. Sumikawa DA, Marshall GW, Gee L, Marshall SJ. Microstructure of primary tooth dentin. Pediatric Dentistry 1999; 21(7):439- 444.
9. Hosoya Y, Kawashita Y, Yoshida M, Suefuji C, Marshall GW Jr. Fluoridated light - activated bonding resin adhesion to enamel and dentin: primary vs. permanent. Pediatric Dentistry 2000;22(2): 101-106.
10. Hosoya Y, Nishiguchi M, Kashiwabara Y, Horiuchi A, Goto G. Comparison of two adhesives to primary vs. permanent bovine dentin. J ClinPediatr Dent 1997;22(1):69-76.
11. Emily Placido et al. Evaluation of shear bond strength of two resin-modified glass ionomer cements. Virginia Commonwealth University;2003.
|