Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-06-2017 | Original Article

Self-adhesive resin cements: pH-neutralization, hydrophilicity, and hygroscopic expansion stress

Authors: Lena Roedel, Vera Bednarzig, Renan Belli, Anselm Petschelt, Ulrich Lohbauer, José Zorzin

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 5/2017

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of the study was to investigate the relationship between pH-neutralization, hydrophilicity, and free hygroscopic expansion stress of self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) after storage in artificial saliva.

Materials and methods

The SARCs RelyX Unicem Automix 2 (RX2, 3 M ESPE), iCEM (iCEM, Heraeus) and Maxcem Elite (MCE, Kerr) were under investigation in this study. Cylinders (height × diameter, 6 × 4mm) were prepared from each material and stored in artificial saliva (7d at 37 °C). Cylinder height was measured at baseline and after 7 days. After storage, the compression modulus was measured to calculate the free hygroscopic expansion stress. For pH-neutralization and hydrophilicity assessment, disks (height × diameter, 1 × 1.5 mm) were prepared, covered with electrolyte, and monitored over 24 h at 37 °C. Hydrophilicity was assessed using the static sessile drop technique at baseline and at different time intervals up to 24 h. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Student-Newman-Keuls test (S-N-K, α = 0.05).

Results

After 24 h, RX2 (pH_24h 4.68) had a significantly higher (p < 0.05) pH-value than MCE (pH_24h 4.2) and iCEM (pH_24h 3.23). iCEM showed the significantly highest hydrophilicity (p < 0.05) after 24 h (θ_24h 85.02°), while MCE resulted lower (θ_24h 113.01°) in comparison with RX2 (θ_24h 108.11°). The resulting hygroscopic expansion stress of iCEM (29.15 MPa) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) compared to RX2 (14.5 MPa) and MCE (21.02 MPa).

Conclusions

The material with lowest pH-neutralization capacity displayed higher hydrophilicity after 24 h and higher hygroscopic expansion stress after 7 days compared to those with high pH-neutralization.

Clinical significance

Remnant hydrophilicity due to low pH-neutralization of SARCs could lead to cement interface stress build-up and long-term failure of silicate ceramic restorations.

Ferracane JL, Stansbury JW, Burke FJ (2011) Self-adhesive resin cements—chemistry, properties and clinical considerations. J Oral Rehabil 38:295–314CrossRefPubMed

Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M (2008) Limited decalcification/diffusion of self-adhesive cements into dentin. J Dent Res 87:974–979CrossRefPubMed

Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, Zuchner H, Schafer E (2006) Chemical analysis and bonding reaction of Rely X Unicem and Bifix composites—a comparative study. Dent Mater 22:934–941CrossRefPubMed

Madruga FC, Ogliari FA, Ramos TS, Bueno M, Moraes RR (2013) Calcium hydroxide, pH-neutralization and formulation of model self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 29:413–418CrossRefPubMed

Zorzin J, Petschelt A, Ebert J, Lohbauer U (2012) pH neutralization and influence on mechanical strength in self-adhesive resin luting agents. Dent Mater 28:672–679CrossRefPubMed

Saskalauskaite E, Tam LE, McComb D (2008) Flexural strength, elastic modulus, and pH profile of self-etch resin luting cements. J Prosthodont 17:262–268CrossRefPubMed

Vrochari AD, Eliades G, Hellwig E, Wrbas KT (2009) Curing efficiency of four self-etching, self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 25:1104–1108CrossRefPubMed

Vrochari AD, Eliades G, Hellwig E, Wrbas KT (2010) Water sorption and solubility of four self-etching, self-adhesive resin luting agents. J Adhes Dent 12:39–43PubMed

Li J, Li H, Fok AS, Watts DC (2009) Multiple correlations of material parameters of light-cured dental composites. Dent Mater 25:829–836CrossRefPubMed

10.

Costa LA, Carneiro KK, Tanaka A, Lima DM, Bauer J (2014) Evaluation of pH, ultimate tensile strength, and micro-shear bond strength of two self-adhesive resin cements. Braz Oral Res 28:1–7CrossRef

11.

Park JW, Ferracane JL (2014) Water aging reverses residual stresses in hydrophilic dental composites. J Dent Res 93:195–200CrossRefPubMed

12.

Belli R, Pelka M, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U (2009) In vitro wear gap formation of self-adhesive resin cements: a CLSM evaluation. J Dent 37:984–993CrossRefPubMed

13.

Ferracane JL (2006) Hygroscopic and hydrolytic effects in dental polymer networks. Dent Mater 22:211–222CrossRefPubMed

14.

McCabe JF, Rusby S (2004) Water absorption, dimensional change and radial pressure in resin matrix dental restorative materials. Biomaterials 25:4001–4007CrossRefPubMed

15.

Versluis A, Tantbirojn D, Lee MS, LS T, DeLong R (2011) Can hygroscopic expansion compensate polymerization shrinkage? Part I. Deformation of restored teeth. Dent Mater 27:126–133

16.

Chutinan S, Platt JA, Cochran MA, Moore BK (2004) Volumetric dimensional change of six direct core materials. Dent Mater 20:345–351CrossRefPubMed

17.

Leevailoj C, Platt JA, Cochran MA, Moore BK (1998) In vitro study of fracture incidence and compressive fracture load of all-ceramic crowns cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer and other luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 80:699–707CrossRefPubMed

18.

Sindel J, Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A (1999) Crack formation of all-ceramic crowns dependent on different core build-up and luting materials. J Dent 27:175–181CrossRefPubMed

19.

Sterzenbach G, Karajouli G, Tunjan R, Spintig T, Bitter K, Naumann M (2015) Damage of lithium-disilicate all-ceramic restorations by an experimental self-adhesive resin cement used as core build-ups. Clin Oral Investig 19:281–288CrossRefPubMed

20.

Taschner M, Nato F, Mazzoni A, Frankenberger R, Falconi M, Petschelt A, Breschi L (2012) Influence of preliminary etching on the stability of bonds created by one-step self-etch bonding systems. Eur J Oral Sci 120:239–248

21.

Han L, Okamoto A, Fukushima M, Okiji T (2007) Evaluation of physical properties and surface degradation of self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater J 26:906–914

22.

Marghalani HY (2012) Sorption and solubility characteristics of self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 28:e187–e198

23.

Ping ZH, Nguyen QT, Chen SM, Zhou JQ, Ding YD (2001) States of water in different hydrophilic polymers - DSC and FTIR studies. Polymer 42:8461–8467

24.

Yiu CK, King NM, Carrilho MR, Sauro S, Rueggeberg FA, Prati C, Carvalho RM, Pashley DH, Tay FR (2006) Effect of resin hydrophilicity and temperature on water sorption of dental adhesive resins. Biomaterials 27:1695–1703

25.

Nomoto R, Komoriyama M, McCabe JF, Hirano S (2004) Effect of mixing method on the porosity of encapsulated glass ionomer cement. Dent Mater 20:972–978

26.

Boaro LC, Goncalves F, Guimaraes TC, Ferracane JL, Pfeifer CS, Braga RR (2013) Sorption, solubility, shrinkage and mechanical properties of "low-shrinkage" commercial resin composites. Dent Mater 29:398–404

27.

da Silva EM, Poskus LT, Guimaraes JG (2008) Influence of light-polymerization modes on the degree of conversion and mechanical properties of resin composites: a comparative analysis between a hybrid and a nanofilled composite. Oper Dent 33:287–293

28.

Adusei G, Deb S, Nicholson JW, Mou L, Singh G (2003) Polymerization behavior of an organophosphorus monomer for use in dental restorative materials. J Appl Polym Sci 88:565–569

29.

Wei YJ, Silikas N, Zhang ZT, Watts DC (2011) Hygroscopic dimensional changes of self-adhering and new resin-matrix composites during water sorption/desorption cycles. Dent Mater 27:259–266

30.

Alrahlah A, Silikas N, Watts DC (2014) Hygroscopic expansion kinetics of dental resin-composites. Dent Mater 30:143–148

31.

Sideridou ID, Karabela MM, Vouvoudi E (2008) Volumetric dimensional changes of dental light-cured dimethacrylate resins after sorption of water or ethanol. Dent Mater 24:1131–1136CrossRefPubMed

32.

Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM, Fisher AC (2003) Hygroscopic expansion and solubility of composite restoratives. Dent Mater 19:77–86CrossRefPubMed

33.

ISO (2009) 4049:2009 Dentistry - Polymer-based restorative materials. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

34.

Lohbauer U (2009) Dental glass ionomer cements as permanent filling materials? – properties, limitations and future trends. Materials 3:76–96CrossRef

35.

Mese A, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ (2008) Sorption and solubility of luting cements in different solutions. Dent Mater J 27:702–709CrossRefPubMed

Title: Self-adhesive resin cements: pH-neutralization, hydrophilicity, and hygroscopic expansion stress
Authors: Lena Roedel
Vera Bednarzig
Renan Belli
Anselm Petschelt
Ulrich Lohbauer
José Zorzin
Publication date: 01-06-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 5/2017
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1947-4

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Self-adhesive resin cements: pH-neutralization, hydrophilicity, and hygroscopic expansion stress

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical significance

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical significance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2017

A clinical study on single-visit root canal retreatments on consecutive 173 patients: frequency of periapical complications and clinical success rate

Efficacy of various side-to-side toothbrushes and impact of brushing parameters on noncontact biofilm removal in an interdental space model

Effect of fiber insertion depth on antibacterial efficacy of photodynamic therapy against Enterococcus faecalis in rootcanals

The mycobiome of root canal infections is correlated to the bacteriome

Influence of increment thickness on dentin bond strength and light transmission of composite base materials

Effect of non-surgical periodontal treatment by full-mouth disinfection or scaling and root planing per quadrant in halitosis—a randomized controlled clinical trial