Abstract
Objective: Compare the effects of different pre-cementing cleaning protocols on adhesive bond strength (MPa) in indirect composite resin restorations contaminated with saliva. Materials and Methods: 110 tests bodies of indirect composite resin, divided into 2 groups: with no contamination (NC); with contamination (WC); distributed in 22 subgroups (n = 5) according to the Ultrasound (U) variables; Cleaning Paste (CP); Ethanol 96 ° (E), Application times: 5-20-30-180s. Five cylinders (1mm high x 0.7 Ø) of cement (Variolink Esthetic LC) per sample made on treated and light-cured surfaces (20s). After 24hrs / 37ºC + distilled water, they were subjected to the RUA test (0.5 mm / min) until fracture point in a universal test machine. Analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test (α = 0.05).Results: Contaminated CP30’’ was the protocol with the highest binding resistance (14.57 ± 1.01) (p <0.05). Conclusion: The gold standard technique - corresponding to ultrasonic washing - is unrecommended for cleaning indirect composite resin restoration, seen as there are other more effective protocols to eliminate surface contaminants. Cleaning paste and Ethanol in times of 20’’ or 30’’ are suggested.
Highlights
IntroductionThe increasing use of resin composites in the last few years has meant the improvement of its physical-mechanical properties and bonding systems[1,2,3,4]
The gold standard technique - corresponding to ultrasonic washing - is unrecommended for cleaning indirect composite resin restoration, seen as there are other more effective protocols to eliminate surface contaminants
The increasing use of resin composites in the last few years has meant the improvement of its physical-mechanical properties and bonding systems[1,2,3,4]
Summary
The increasing use of resin composites in the last few years has meant the improvement of its physical-mechanical properties and bonding systems[1,2,3,4]. Deficiencies of direct composite resin persist that are expected to be resolved through the indication of indirect resins when the loss of dental structure is more significant. Among these last-mentioned techniques, the cementation process is crucial for both the restoration as its clinical performance and longevity[5,6]. Amid the critical steps of indirect resins are the pre-cementation procedures that consider the surface's cleansing and conditioning. This step can be vulnerable to contamination of fluids during intraoral adjustments tests[7,8]. Contamination before or during cementation may lead to a decreased quality of linking, leading to adverse effects on longevity and maintenance of restoration, sensitivity, and discoloration[11]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
