Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2023; 17(03): 917-923
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1756692
Original Article

Microshear Bond Strength of Bioactive Materials to Dentin and Resin Composite

Basma Ahmed
1   Operative Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Delta University for Science and Technology, Gamasa, Egypt
,
Hamdi H. Hamama 
2   Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
3   Restorative Dentistry Dept, New-Mansoura University, New Mansoura, Egypt
,
Salah Hasab Mahmoud
2   Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
4   Conservative Dentistry Dept, Horus University, New Damietta, Egypt
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate microshear bond strength (μSBS) of bioactive ionic resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer liner (RMGI) to dentin and resin composite.

Materials and Methods The enamel of 11 posterior molar teeth was removed to expose dentin and then placed in acrylic blocks. Each specimen received three microcylindrical Tygon tubes filled with bioactive ionic resin composite (Activa Bioactive base/liner (Pulpdent, MA, USA)), RMGI (Riva light cure SDI LTD, Bayswater, Australia), and resin composite (Filtek Z350xt, MN, USA). Composite discs (n = 11) were fabricated from nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350xt) and then fixed in acrylic blocks. Each specimen received two microcylindrical Tygon tubes filled with Activa Bioactive base/liner and Riva RMGI. All specimens were mounted individually to universal testing machine for μSBS test. Failure modes were analyzed using stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope.

Results Filtek Z350xt nanofilled resin composite showed the highest μSBS values. No statistical significant difference was found between Activa Bioactive and Riva RMGI (p > 0.05).

Conclusion Bioactive ionic resin composite liner exhibited similar bond strength as RMGI to dentin and resin composite.

Keywords

bioactive materials - resin-modified glass ionomer - microshear - glass ionomer


Publication History

Article published online:
28 October 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Zhang W, Yelick PC. Vital pulp therapy-current progress of dental pulp regeneration and revascularization. Int J Dent 2010; 2010: 856087
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bitello-Firmino L, Soares VK, Damé-Teixeira N, Parolo CCF, Maltz M. Microbial load after selective and complete caries removal in permanent molars: a randomized clinical trial. Braz Dent J 2018; 29 (03) 290-295
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Imparato JCP, Moreira KMS, Olegário IC, da Silva SREP, Raggio DP. Partial caries removal increases the survival of permanent tooth: a 14-year case report. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2017; 18 (06) 423-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Thompson V, Craig RG, Curro FA, Green WS, Ship JA. Treatment of deep carious lesions by complete excavation or partial removal: a critical review. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139 (06) 705-712
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Pereira MA, Santos-Júnior RBD, Tavares JA. et al. No additional benefit of using a calcium hydroxide liner during stepwise caries removal: a randomized clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc 2017; 148 (06) 369-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kunert M, Lukomska-Szymanska M. Bio-inductive materials in direct and indirect pulp capping-a review article. Materials (Basel) 2020; 13 (05) 1204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hilton TJ. Sealers, liners, and bases. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016; 28 (03) 141-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sauro S, Makeeva I, Faus-Matoses V. et al. Effects of ions-releasing restorative materials on the dentin bonding longevity of modern universal adhesives after load cycle and prolonged artificial saliva aging. Materials (Basel) 2019; 12 (05) 722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ebaya MM, Ali AI, Mahmoud SH. Evaluation of marginal adaptation and microleakage of three glass ionomer-based class V restorations: in vitro study. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (04) 599-606
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ranjbar Omrani L, Moradi Z, Abbasi M, Kharazifard MJ, Tabatabaei SN. Evaluation of compressive strength of several pulp capping materials. J Dent (Shiraz) 2021; 22 (01) 41-47
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Abou ElReash A, Hamama H, Abdo W, Wu Q, Zaen El-Din A, Xiaoli X. Biocompatibility of new bioactive resin composite versus calcium silicate cements: an animal study. BMC Oral Health 2019; 19 (01) 194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bakir EP, Yildirim ZS, Bakir Ş, Ketani A. Are resin-containing pulp capping materials as reliable as traditional ones in terms of local and systemic biological effects?. Dent Mater J 2022; 41 (01) 78-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Jun SK, Lee JH, Lee HH. The biomineralization of a Bioactive Glass-Incorporated light-curable pulp capping material using human dental pulp stem cells. BioMed Res Int 2017; 2017: 2495282
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Daneshkazemi P, Ghasemi A, Daneshkazemi A, Shafiee F. Evaluation of micro shear bonding strength of two universal dentin bondings to superficial dentin by self etch and etch-and-rinse strategies. J Clin Exp Dent 2018; 10 (09) e837-e843
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Felemban NH, Ebrahim MI. Effect of adhesive layers on microshear bond strength of nanocomposite resin to dentin. J Clin Exp Dent 2017; 9 (02) e186-e190
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Nanavati K, Katge F, Chimata VK, Pradhan D, Kamble A, Patil D. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of bioactive restorative material, zirconia reinforced glass ionomer cement and conventional glass ionomer cement to the dentinal surface of primary molars: an in vitro study. J Dent (Shiraz) 2021; 22 (04) 260-266
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Muñoz MA, Luque I, Hass V, Reis A, Loguercio AD, Bombarda NH. Immediate bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentine. J Dent 2013; 41 (05) 404-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yoshida Y, Yoshihara K, Nagaoka N. et al. Self-assembled nano-layering at the adhesive interface. J Dent Res 2012; 91 (04) 376-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Eight-year clinical evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel etching. Dent Mater 2010; 26 (12) 1176-1184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Toledano M, Osorio R, Osorio E. et al. Durability of resin-dentin bonds: effects of direct/indirect exposure and storage media. Dent Mater 2007; 23 (07) 885-892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Latta MA, Tsujimoto A, Takamizawa T, Barkmeier WW. Enamel and dentin bond durability of self-adhesive restorative materials. J Adhes Dent 2020; 22 (01) 99-105
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011; 27 (01) 17-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Tohidkhah S, Ahmadi E, Abbasi M, Morvaridi Farimani R, Ranjbar Omrani L. Effect of bioinductive cavity liners on shear bond strength of dental composite to dentin. BioMed Res Int 2022; 2022: 3283211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rifai H, Qasim S, Mahdi S. et al. In-vitro evaluation of the shear bond strength and fluoride release of a new bioactive dental composite material. J Clin Exp Dent 2022; 14 (01) e55-e63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F, Morrow BR, Jefferies SR. Flexural strength and flexural fatigue properties of resin-modified glass ionomers. J Clin Dent 2015; 26 (01) 23-27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U, Benetti A. A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity. Dent Mater 2019; 35 (02) 335-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ramos AB, Moro AFV, Rocha GM, Reis Perez CD. Micro-shear bond strength of composite resin to glass ionomer cement using an alternative method to build up test specimens. Indian J Dent Res 2018; 29 (05) 651-656
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gupta R, Mahajan S. Shear bond strength evaluation of resin composite bonded to GIC using different adhesives. J Clin Diagn Res 2015; 9 (01) ZC27-ZC29
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sabatini C. Effect of phosphoric acid etching on the shear bond strength of two self-etch adhesives. J Appl Oral Sci 2013; 21 (01) 56-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tantbirojn D, Cheng YS, Versluis A, Hodges JS, Douglas WH. Nominal shear or fracture mechanics in the assessment of composite-dentin adhesion?. J Dent Res 2000; 79 (01) 41-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 El Wakeel AM, Elkassas DW, Yousry MM. Bonding of contemporary glass ionomer cements to different tooth substrates; microshear bond strength and scanning electron microscope study. Eur J Dent 2015; 9 (02) 176-182
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar