Joggle lap shear testing of deep occlusal composite restorations lined with Dycal, Dycal LC, conventional or resin-modified glass ionomer

Vera Stojanovska; Chris S Ivanoff; Ilijana Muratovska; Lidija Popovska; Franklin Garcia-Godoy; Timothy L. Hottel; Dejan LJ. Marković; Brian Morrow

doi:10.2298/VSP150816226S

Vera Stojanovska Department of Cariology and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Sts. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia
Chris S Ivanoff Department of Bioscience Research College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA
Ilijana Muratovska Department of Cariology and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Sts. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia
Lidija Popovska Department of Cariology and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Sts. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia
Franklin Garcia-Godoy Department of Bioscience Research College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA
Timothy L. Hottel Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA
Dejan LJ. Marković Department of Paediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
Brian Morrow Department of Bioscience Research College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN, USA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP150816226S

Keywords: biomechanics, dentin-bonding agents, adhesives, dental cements, calcium hydroxide, materials testing, in vitro,

Abstract

Background/Aim. The longevity of a dental restoration may be predicted to some degree by its adhesive ability, and this, in turn, can be measured by bond strength testing between restorative materials and tooth structure. The aim of this study was to test an innovative joggle lap shearing jig that integrates the tooth and the entire biomechanical unit into testing, to compare the shear bond strengths of Class I occlusal composite restorations in deep cavity preparations lined with Dycal, Dycal LC, conventional glass ionomer or resin-modified glass ionomer. The mode of failure (adhesive, cohesive, mixed) after debonding was determined by stereomicroscopy.
Methods. A total of 150 standardized occlusal cavities were prepared and divided into five groups. The group I cavities (n = 30) were coated with adhesive (ExciTE^®F) and filled directly with composite (TetricEvoCeram). The group II and III cavities were lined with Dycal (n = 30) or Dycal LC (n = 30) before placing composite.
The groups IV and V specimens were based with Fuji IX (n = 30) or Fuji II LC (n = 30). Shear bond strengths were determined with a universal testing machine and fractured bonding sites were analyzed under stereomicroscope. The mean bond strengths were analyzed using one-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05) and the means between the groups were analyzed with Student’s t-test. Results. The shear bond strength (MPa) of composite restorations in cavities without base (23.91 ± 4.54) was higher than cavities lined with Fuji II LC (17.45 ± 2.74), Fuji IX (8.76 ± 2.57), Dycal LC (13.07 ± 1.84) or Dycal (6.12 ± 1.28). The results using the jogged lap shearing jig were consistent with the literature. Conclusion. The shear bond strength of occlusal composite restorations in deep cavities without liners was greater than cavities lined with Fuji II LC > Fuji IX > Dycal LC > Dycal.

References

Sirisha K, Rambabu T, Shankar YR, Ravikumar P. Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review. Part I. J Conserv Dent 2014; 17(4): 305−11.

Sudsangiam S, Noort R. Do dentin bond strength tests serve a useful purpose. J Adhes Dent 1999; 1(1): 57−67.

Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: Current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 2003; 28(3): 215−35.

Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary ad-hesives: A systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Ma-ter 2005; 21(9): 864−81.

Dental materials: Testing of adhesion to tooth structure. ISO/TS 11405:2003 [published on 2003 February 1]. Available from: www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber...

Heintz SD. Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between la-boratory tests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation between marginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent 2007; 9 Suppl 1: 77−106.

Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Mine A, Van Ende A, Neves A, et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 2010; 26(2): e100−21.

Salz U, Bock T. Testing adhesion of direct restoratives to den-tal hard tissue - a review. J Adhes Dent 2010; 12(5): 343−71.

Braga RR, Meira JB, Boaro LC, Xavier TA. Adhesion to tooth structure: A critical review of "macro" test methods. Dent Ma-ter 2010; 26(2): e38−49.

De Munck J, Mine A, Poitevin A, Van Ende A, Van Meerbeek G. Testing bond strength. A review of the literature. Dent Mater 2010; 26: e139−40.

Leloup G, Hoore DW, Bouter D, Degrange M, Vreven J. Meta-analytical review of factors involved in dentin adherence. J Dent Res 2001; 80(7): 1605−14.

DeHoff PH, Anusavice KJ, Wang Z. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the shear bond test. Dent Mater 1995; 11(2): 126−31.

Armstrong S, Geraldeli S, Maia R, Raposo LH, Soares CJ, Yamagawa J. Adhesion to tooth structure: A critical review of "micro" bond strength test methods. Dent Mater 2010; 26(2): e50−62.

Van Noort R, Noroozi S, Howard IC, Cardew G. A critique of bond strength measurements. J Dent 1989; 17(2): 61−7.

Foong J, Lee K, Nguyen C, Tang G, Austin D, Ch'ng C, et al. Com-parison of microshear bond strengths of four self-etching bonding systems to enamel using two test methods. Aust Dent J 2006; 51(3): 252−7.

Sinhoreti MA, Consani S, De Goes MF, Sobrinho LC, Knowles JC. Influence of loading types on the shear strength of the dentin-resin interface bonding. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2001; 12(1): 39−44.

Pecora N, Yaman P, Dennison J, Herrero A. Comparison of shear bond strength relative to two testing devices. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88(5): 511−5.

Placido E, Meira JB, Lima RG, Muench A, Souza RM, Ballester RY. Shear versus micro-shear bond strength test: A finite element stress analysis. Dent Mater 2007; 23(9): 1086−92.

McDonough WG, Antonucci JM, He J, Shimada Y, Chiang MY, Schumacher GE, et al. A microshear test to measure bond strengths of dentin-polymer interfaces. Biomaterials 2002; 23(17): 3603−8.

Van Meerbeek B, Peumans B, Poitevin M, Mine A, Van A, Ende A, et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater 2010; 26(2): e100−21.

Tedesco TK, Garcia EJ, Maxnuck Soares FZ, de Oliveira Rocha R, Grande RH. Effect of two microsheartest devices on bond strength and fracture pattern in primary teeth. Braz Dent J 2013; 24(6): 605−9.

Sano H, Shono T, Sonoda H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Carvalho R, et al. Relationship between surface area for adhesion and tensile bond strength: evaluation of a micro-tensile bond test. Dent Mater 1994; 10(4): 236−40.

Phrukkanon S, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The influence of cross-sectional shape and surface area on the microtensile bond test. Dent Mater 1998; 14(3): 212−21.

Abreu CW, Santos JF, Passos SP, Michida SM, Takahashi FE, Bot-tino MA. The influence of cutting speed and cutting initiation location in specimen preparation for the microtensile bond strength test. J Adhes Dent 2011; 13(3): 221−6.

Raposo LH, Armstrong SR, Maia RR, Qian F, Geraldeli S, Soares CJ. Effect of specimen gripping device, geometry and fixation method on microtensile bond strength, failure mode and stress distribution: laboratory and finite element analyses. Dent Mater 2012; 28(5): e50−62.

Nujella BP, Choudary MT, Reddy SP, Kumar MK, Gopal T. Com-parison of shear bond strength of aesthetic restorative mate-rials. Contemp Clin Dent 2012; 3(1): 22−6.

Allanigue CM, Rapp R, Piesco NP, Elliott MA, Nirschl RF, Guevara PA, et al. Adaptation of composite resin restorative materials to retentive grooves of Class I cavity preparations. Pediatr Dent 1986; 8(3): 147−52.

Braz R, Sinhoreti MA, Spazzin AO, Loretto SC, Lyra AM, Meira-Júnior AD. Shear bond strength test using different loading conditions: A finite element analysis. Braz J Oral Sci 2010; 9(4): 439−42.

Hilton TJ. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 1. Am J Dent 2002; 15(3): 198−210.

Schuurs AH, Gruythuysen RJ, Wesselink PR. Pulp capping with adhesive resin-based composite vs. calcium hydroxide: A re-view. Endod Dent Traumat 2000; 16(6): 240−50.

Stojanovska V, Stevanović M, Mitić A. In vitro comparison of shear bond strength of two resin composites to enamel and dentine using Excite as an adhesive. Acta Stomatol Naissi 2005; 21(50): 429−36. (Serbian)

Khatri A, Nandlal B, Srilatha M. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of conventional composite resin and na-nocomposite resin to sandblasted primary anterior stainless steel crown. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2007; 25: 282−5.

Dominguez MS, Witherspoon DE, Gutmann JL, Opperman LA. Histological and Scanning Electron Microscopy Assessment of Various Vital Pulp-Therapy Materials. J Endod 2003; 29(5): 324−33.

Bona AD, Pinzetta C, Rosa V. Effect of acid etching of glass io-nomer cement surface on the microleakage of sandwich resto-rations. J Oral Sci 2007; 15(3): 230−4.

El-Askay FM, Nassif MS, Andrade AM, Reis A, Loguercio AD. Effect of surface area and air drying distance on shear strength of etch-and-rinse adhesive. Braz Oral Res 2012; 26: 418−23.

Khoroushi M, Rafiei E. Effect of thermocycling and water sto-rage on bond longevity of two self-etch adhesives. Gen Dent 2013; 61(3): 39−44.

Burger KM, Cooley RL, Garcia-Godoy F. Effect of thermocycling times on dentin bond strength. J Esthet Dent 1992; 4(6): 197−8.

Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M, Koliniotou-Kubia E, Dionyssopoulos P. The effect of thermal cycling on the bovine dentine shear bond strength of current adhesive systems. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31(9): 911−7.

Miyazaki M, Sato M, Onose H, Moore BK. Influence of thermal cycling on dentin bond strength of two-step bonding systems. Am J Dent 1998; 11(3): 118−22.

Siqueira JF, Rocas IN, Abad EC, Castro AJ, Gahyva SM, Favieri A. Ability of three root-end filling materials to prevent bacteria leakage. J Endod 2001; 27(11): 673−5.

Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report. J Adhes Dent 2001; 3(2): 185−94.

Davidson Cl, de Gee AJ, Fielzer A. The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization con-traction stress. J Dent Res 1983; 63(12): 1396−9.

Munksgaard EC, Irie M, Asmussen E. Dentin-polymer bond promoted by Gluma and various resins. J Dent Res 1985; 64(12): 1409−11.

von Fraunhofer JA, Marshall KR, Holman BG. The effect of base ⁄ liner use on restoration leakage. Gen Dent 2006; 54(2): 106−9.

Murray PE, García-Godoy F. The incidence of pulp healing de-fects with direct capping materials. Am J Dent 2006; 19(3): 171−7. 46.

Dickens SH, Kelly SR, Flaim GM, Giuseppetti AA. Dentin adhe-sion and microleakage of a resin-based calcium phosphate pulp capping and basing cement. Eur J Oral Sci 2004; 112(5): 452−7.

Triana R, Prado C, Garro J, García-Godoy F. Dentin bond strength of fluoride-releasing materials. Am J Dent 1994; 7(5): 252−4.

Bell R, Barkmeier WW. Glass-ionomer restoratives and liners: Shear bond strength to dentine. J Esthet Dent 1994; 6(3): 129−34.

Fortin D, Vargas MA, Swift EJ. Bonding of resin composites to resin-modified glass ionomers. Am J Dent 1995; 8(4): 201−4.

Lin A, Mcintyre NS, Davidson RD. Studies on adhesion of glass-ionomer cement to dentin. J Dent Res 1992; 71(11): 1936−41.

Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BA. Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations. J Adhes Dent 2007; 9(5): 469−75.

Goracci G, Mori G. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of resin-dentin and calcium hydroxide-dentin interface with resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int 1996; 27(2): 129−35.

Estrela C, Holland R. Calcium hydroxide: Study based on scien-tific evidences. J Appl Oral Sci 2003; 11(4): 269−82.

Cheung G. An in vitro evaluation of five dentinal adhesives in posterior restorations. Quintessence Int 1990; 21(6): 513−6.