Correlation between clinical performance and degree of conversion of resin cements: a literature review

AbstractResin-based cements have been frequently employed in clinical practice to lute indirect restorations. However, there are numerous factors that may compromise the clinical performance of those cements. The aim of this literature review is to present and discuss some of the clinical factors that may affect the performance of current resin-based luting systems. Resin cements may have three different curing mechanisms: chemical curing, photo curing or a combination of both. Chemically cured systems are recommended to be used under opaque or thick restorations, due to the reduced access of the light. Photo-cured cements are mainly indicated for translucent veneers, due to the possibility of light transmission through the restoration. Dual-cured are more versatile systems and, theoretically, can be used in either situation, since the presence of both curing mechanisms might guarantee a high degree of conversion (DC) under every condition. However, it has been demonstrated that clinical procedures and characteristics of the materials may have many different implications in the DC of currently available resin cements, affecting their mechanical properties, bond strength to the substrate and the esthetic results of the restoration. Factors such as curing mechanism, choice of adhesive system, indirect restorative material and light-curing device may affect the degree of conversion of the cement and, therefore, have an effect on the clinical performance of resin-based cements. Specific measures are to be taken to ensure a higher DC of the luting system to be used

Adhesive cementation of prosthetic restorations: Contemporary Aspects

The esthetic outcome of dental treatment has become recently, an issue of great importance. This is the reason why contemporary dental treatment utilizes a lot more all-ceramic restorations than it used to. Despite the rapid evolution in the field of all-ceramic systems, most of these restorations depend their longevity on their cementation with resin cements. However, since resin cements are considered to be technique sensitive materials, dental material companies have focused on developing products that simplify clinical procedures. Therefore, new cement products that might have different indications and instructions for use, have been constantly launched on the market. Among this large number of materials, the general dentist might have a difficulty in choosing the right product for the right application. The aim of the present paper is the concise presentation of the adhesive systems and types of resin cements available on the market, as well as their manipulation, in order to facilitate the general dentist in the correct choice and proper use of product.No Full Tex

Effects of coronal substrates and water storage on the microhardness of a resin cement used for luting ceramic crowns

Composite resin and metallic posts are the materials most employed for reconstruction of teeth presenting partial or total destruction of crowns. Resin-based cements have been widely used for cementation of ceramic crowns. The success of cementation depends on the achievement of adequate cement curing. Objectives: To evaluate the microhardness of Variolink® II (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), used for cementing ceramic crowns onto three different coronal substrate preparations (dentin, metal, and composite resin), after 7 days and 3 months of water storage. The evaluation was performed along the cement line in the cervical, medium and occlusal thirds on the buccal and lingual aspects, and on the occlusal surface. Material and Methods: Thirty molars were distributed in three groups (N=10) according to the type of coronal substrate: Group D- the prepared surfaces were kept in dentin; Groups M (metal) and R (resin)- the crowns were sectioned at the level of the cementoenamel junction and restored with metallic cast posts or resin build-up cores, respectively. The crowns were fabricated in ceramic IPS e.max® Press (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) and luted with Variolink II. After 7 days of water storage, 5 specimens of each group were sectioned in buccolingual direction for microhardness measurements. The other specimens (N=5) were kept stored in deionized water at 37ºC for three months, followed by sectioning and microhardness measurements. Results: Data were first analyzed by three-way ANOVA that did not reveal significant differences between thirds and occlusal surface (p=0.231). Two-way ANOVA showed significant effect of substrates (p<0.001) and the Tukey test revealed that microhardness was significantly lower when crowns were cemented on resin cores and tested after 7 days of water storage (p=0.007). Conclusion: The type of material employed for coronal reconstruction of preparations for prosthetic purposes may influence the cement properties