Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, UKR University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany,
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, UKR University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Am J Dent. 2024 Aug;37(4):183-186.
To investigate the influence of temporary cementation and subsequent bonding on the durability during in-vitro aging-simulation and fracture force of resin-based composite crowns.
Identical molar crowns (n=48, n=8 per group) were milled from resin-based composites and temporarily cemented and finally bonded to human molars. To simulate temporary application, crowns were cemented either with zinc-oxide-eugenol-cement (Tempbond) or with eugenol free zinc-oxide-cement (Tempbond NE). For a first simulation of a long-term provisional clinical application, thermal cycling, and mechanical loading (TCML 2 x 600 x 5°C-55°C, 2 minutes each cycle, distilled water, 240,000 cycles at 50N) was performed. After TCML all crowns were removed, cleaned, and luted either by using etch-and-rinse technique (Vococid, Futurabond U, Bifix QM) or a self-adhesive (Bifix SE) cementation system. A second thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML 2 x3,000 x 5°C/55°C, 2 minutes each cycle, distilled water, 1.2 x 10⁶ at 50N) was accomplished to simulate 5 years of clinical application. To assess the survival of the crowns, the failure rates during TCML were documented. As controls, crowns were included without prior provisional cementation. After TCML all crowns were loaded to failure. Failure was categorized as fracture of the crown and partial loosening of the crown.
All crowns survived both TCML procedures without any failures. The fracture values after TCML varied between 3,538.0 ± 1,041.2 N and 4,612.0 ± 801.5 N without significant (P= 0.146) differences between the individual groups. No correlation was found between fracture force and type of provisional cementation (zinc-oxide-eugenol vs. zinc-oxide: Pearson: -0.063/P= 0.672) or type of bonding (adhesive vs. self-adhesive: Pearson: -0.151/ P= 0.307). No different failure pattern was observed between the tested systems.
Regardless of the type of temporary cementation, there was no effect on the in-vitro performance or strength of the final permanently bonded crowns. Resin-based crowns might be bonded with adhesive or self-adhesive systems even after previous temporary cementation.
研究在体外老化模拟和树脂基复合冠断裂力过程中,临时水门汀和后续粘结对耐久性的影响。
从树脂基复合材料中铣制相同的磨牙冠(每组 48 个,每组 8 个),并临时水门汀固定,最终粘结到人磨牙上。为了模拟临时应用,冠分别用氧化锌丁香酚水门汀(Tempbond)或无丁香酚的氧化锌水门汀(Tempbond NE)粘结。为了首次模拟长期临床应用,进行热循环和机械加载(TCML 2 x 600 x 5°C-55°C,每个循环 2 分钟,蒸馏水,50N 下 240,000 次循环)。完成 TCML 后,所有冠均被去除、清洁,并使用蚀刻-冲洗技术(Vococid、Futurabond U、Bifix QM)或自粘结(Bifix SE)粘结系统进行再次粘结。进行第二次热循环和机械加载(TCML 2 x 3,000 x 5°C/55°C,每个循环 2 分钟,蒸馏水,50N 下 1.2 x 10⁶次循环),以模拟 5 年的临床应用。为了评估冠的存活率,记录了 TCML 过程中的失效率。作为对照,包括未经临时水门汀处理的冠。完成 TCML 后,所有冠均加载至失效。失效分为冠破裂和冠部分松动。
所有冠在两次 TCML 过程中均未失效。TCML 后,断裂值在 3,538.0 ± 1,041.2 N 和 4,612.0 ± 801.5 N 之间,各组间无显著差异(P= 0.146)。未发现断裂力与临时水门汀类型(氧化锌丁香酚与氧化锌:皮尔逊:-0.063/P= 0.672)或粘结类型(粘结与自粘结:皮尔逊:-0.151/P= 0.307)之间存在相关性。未观察到测试系统之间存在不同的失效模式。
无论临时水门汀的类型如何,对最终永久粘结冠的体外性能或强度均无影响。树脂基冠甚至在先前临时水门汀处理后也可以用粘结或自粘结系统粘结。