Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to assess the proper time to perform a restoration (immediately or delayed) after placement of two calcium silicate-based cements (CSCs) and to test the performance of two different restorative protocols regarding shear bond strength (SBS). Seventy-five acrylic blocks were randomly divided into five groups (n = 15). Specimens were filled with either ProRoot MTA (Dentsply Tulsa Dental) or Biodentine (Septodont). The restoration was performed at an immediate (12 min) or delayed (seven days) timeframe, using a resin-based flowable composite (SDR) (bonded to the CSC using a universal bonding system) or glass ionomer cement (GIC) as restorative materials. SBS was measured using a universal testing machine. Fractured surfaces were evaluated, and the pattern was registered. Statistical analysis was performed using the Dunn–Sidak post hoc test (P < 0.05). Biodentine/immediate SDR showed the highest mean SBS value (4.44 MPa), with statistically significant differences when compared to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)/GIC (1.14 MPa) and MTA/immediate SDR (1.33 MPa). MTA/GIC and MTA/immediate SDR did not present significant differences regarding SBS. No statistical differences were verified concerning mean SBS between both CSCs within the 7 day groups. MTA/delayed SDR (3.86 MPa) presented statistical differences compared to MTA/immediate SDR, whereas no differences were observed regarding Biodentine performance (Biodentine/immediate SDR and Biodentine/delayed SDR (3.09 MPa)). Bonding procedures directly on top of MTA might be preferably performed at a delayed timeframe, whereas Biodentine might allow for immediate restoration.
Highlights
Tooth decay, restorative procedures, and several traumatic injuries may lead to pulp exposure and jeopardize both vitality and a successful treatment prognosis [1,2]
Bonding procedures directly on top of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) might be preferably performed at a delayed timeframe, whereas Biodentine might allow for immediate restoration
Pre-test failures occurred in three specimens from group MTA/glass ionomer cement (GIC) and were not included in the analysis (Table 1)
Summary
Restorative procedures, and several traumatic injuries may lead to pulp exposure and jeopardize both vitality and a successful treatment prognosis [1,2]. Vital pulp therapy involves directly placing a biomaterial over the exposed pulp site (direct pulp capping) with the ultimate goal of maintaining pulp vitality by protecting the dentin-pulp complex [1,2,3,4,5]. Vital pulp therapy approaches include indirect pulp capping (biocompatible materials used as a protective barrier) and pulpotomy procedures (biomaterial applied following partial or total amputation of the dental pulp) [5]. Clinical management of immature necrotic teeth might include regenerative endodontic procedures (REPs), with calcium silicate-based cements (CSCs) placement being required in the coronal portion of the root canal [6]. Namely CSCs, were introduced as alternatives to the historically used calcium hydroxide [1]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
