Ethoxybenzoic Acid Research Articles

Comparison of impact strength of joints made with four dental cements

Tests on 4 cements showed the impact strength of joints between gold and tooth structure varied somewhat with the surface roughness and cementing force. Polycarboxylate provided stronger joints although the results were variable. Little difference was found between zinc phosphate, zinc oxide-eugenol with polymethyl methacrylate, and zinc oxide-eugenol with ortho ethoxybenzoic acid.

Pulpal response to four restorative materials

This study deals with pulpal response to four types of restorative material. Class V cavities were prepared in seventy-eight teeth of three miniature swine and were restored with zinc oxide and eugenol, a commercially available product called IRM, a mixture of ethoxybenzoic acid with fillers called EBA, and a mixture of isobutyl cyanoacrylate and zinc phosphate called CAZI. The animals were killed after 1, 2, and 3 weeks, and the teeth were examined microscopically. This study revealed the following: 1. 1. With the exception of one tooth, which showed a micro-abscess, irreversible pulp damage was not observed. 2. 2. All three of the restorative materials appear biologically acceptable to the dental pulp. 3. 3. Odontoblastic disruption and inflammatory infiltrate were not severe in any case. They were, however, least marked in the zinc oxide and eugenol restorations and most prominent in teeth restored with cyanoacrylate-containing restorative material. 4. 4. The layer of reparative dentine formed in response to the filling materials was proportional to the degree of odontoblastic disruption and the inflammator yinfiltrate. It was more prominent in those teeth which were restored with CAZI and EBA than in teeth filled with the other materials. 5. 5. It appears from this study that any of the three experimental materials tested could be used as filling materials. However, in cases in which the therapeutic aim is to acquire a thick layer of reparative dentine, a cavity base with either the EBA or CAZI would be preferable. On the other hand, where these materials are to be used as semipermanent restorations rather than as cavity bases, their physical properties and their resistance to the oral environment should be the decisive factors.