In vitro comparison of shear bond strength of a flowable composite resin and a single-component glass-ionomer to three different pulp-capping agents.

Maryam Zare Jahromi,Parvin Mirzakoochaki Broujeni,Reza Roozbeh,Paridokht Zarean,Parichehr Zarean

doi:10.17219/dmp/109233

Abstract

Various materials are used for vital pulp capping and the bond strength of restorative materials to these pulp-capping agents significantly affects the success rate of vital pulp therapy. The aim of this study was to determine the shear bond strength of a flowable composite resin and a single-component glass-ionomer to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement and BiodentineTM as pulp-capping agents. Seventy-two cylindrical acrylic resin blocks, with a central hole 4 mm × 2 mm, were prepared. Mineral trioxide aggregate, CEM cement and Biodentine were placed in the cavities (n = 24 in each group) and incubated for 24 h. The blocks were subdivided into the composite resin and glassionomer subgroups. Cylindrical plastic molds, measuring 3 mm in height and diameter, were used to place the restorative materials on the samples. The shear bond strength test was performed at a strain rate of 1 mm/min in a universal testing machine. The samples were evaluated under a stereomicroscope at ×25 magnification for fracture modes. The data was analyzed with the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests. The maximum and minimum mean shear bond strength values were recorded in the Biodentinecomposite resin (4.77 MPa) and MTA-glass-ionomer (2.20 MPa) groups, respectively. There were significant differences in the mean shear bond strength values of MTA, CEM cement and Biodentine to the composite resin and glass-ionomer (p < 0.001). A composite material may be preferable for definitive filling after pulp capping with Biodentine.

Highlights

Vital pulp therapy consists in placing a biocompatible material on the exposed pulp of the teeth with an open apex.[1]
The maximum and minimum mean shear bond strength values were recorded in the Biodentine–composite resin (4.77 MPa) and mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)–glass-ionomer (2.20 MPa) groups, respectively
Various materials are used for pulp capping, including calcium hydroxide, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and newer silicate-based cements, such as BioAggregate®, EndoSequence®, BiodentineTM, etc.[2]

Summary

Introduction

Vital pulp therapy consists in placing a biocompatible material on the exposed pulp of the teeth with an open apex.[1]. Mineral trioxide aggregate is a hydrophilic cement composed of calcium oxide, silica and bismuth oxide. Several successful clinical applications have been reported for MTA.[1] Long-term studies (over 3 years) have reported that the success rate of vital pulp therapy with MTA is higher than in the case of calcium hydroxide (78% vs 60%).[2] These favorable outcomes for direct pulp therapy with MTA have been confirmed in recent systematic reviews.[3] Despite the various reported advantages, MTA has some disadvantages, including potential for discoloration, difficult handling, long setting time, high cost, unavailability of a solvent, and difficulty with its removal after setting.[4]. Various materials are used for vital pulp capping and the bond strength of restorative materials to these pulp-capping agents significantly affects the success rate of vital pulp therapy

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion