Dent Mater. 2020 Sep;36(9):1170-1182. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2020.05.005. Epub 2020 Jun 11.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The first objective of this study was to determine if the luting material used for resin nanoceramic inlay affects interfacial adaptation. The second was to investigate whether pretreatment and the adhesive curing method before cementation affects interfacial adaptation. The final objective was to compare activation modes of luting material.
METHODS: Class I cavities were prepared on extracted human third molars. Resin nanoceramic inlays were fabricated using Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM block (3 M). For the control groups, inlays were cemented using Panavia V5 (Kuraray Noritake). For the experimental groups, teeth were randomly divided into five experimental groups with four subgroups using different self-adhesive cements (SACs). Cement in Group I was dual-cured without pretreatment. In Group II, the cement was dual-cured after polyacrylic acid treatment of the tooth cavity. In Groups III and IV, the cement was dual-cured after universal dentin adhesive treatment with pre-cure and co-cure methods. In Group V, the inlay was cemented in self-cure mode. After thermocycling, interfacial adaptation at the inlay-tooth interface was measured using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) imaging. Finally, polymerization shrinkage strain of the luting material was measured and compared.
RESULTS: Interfacial adaptation differed depending on the luting material. After application of a universal adhesive, some subgroups showed improved interfacial adaptation. Interfacial adaptation and polymerization shrinkage strain differed significantly depending on activation mode.
SIGNIFICANCE: Interfacial adaptation for a resin nanoceramic inlay can differ according to the type of SAC and activation mode. For some SACs, application of a universal adhesive before cementation improves interfacial adaptation.
PMID:32536587 | DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2020.05.005