ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the microshear bond strength (µ-SBS) between resin-based cements and core build-up materials after water storage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cylinders (1x1 mm) of conventional dual-cure resin cement (RelyX ARC, 3M ESPE), universal dual-cure resin cement (RelyX Ultimate, 3M ESPE) or self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U200, 3M ESPE) were adhered to disks (6x2 mm) made with commercial core build-up materials (Bis-Core, Bisco or LuxaCore Z, DMG) or conventional nanocomposite resin (Filtek Z350 XT, 3M ESPE). The specimens (n=10) were submitted to µ-SBS test using a universal testing machine and fracture pattern analysis at 48 hours or after 9 months of water storage. The data were evaluated by three-way ANOVA for repeated measures and Tukey's test (α=0.05). RESULTS: After 48 hours, regardless of the resin-based cement used, the µ-SBS to the conventional resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT) was greater compared to other materials. However, after 9 months, there was a statistically significant decrease in µ-SBS values between the conventional resin composite and evaluated luting agents. The µ-SBS values of core build-up commercial materials (Bis-Core and LuxaCore Z) did not change over time. Regardless of the composite used and storage time, there was no statistically significant difference between the resin-based cements. After 48 h, the most prevalent failure was mixed for all groups. However, after 9 months, the core build-up materials showed a predominantly mixed fracture pattern whereas the resin composite presented an adhesive pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Commercial core build-up materials achieved stable bonding performance with resin-based cements over time. Key words:Composite resins, resin cement, dental restoration failure.
ABSTRACT
This in vitro study aimed to investigate the anti-erosive effect of antacid suspensions applied to enamel after exposure to hydrochloric acid (HCl). Ninety bovine enamel slabs were embedded, flattened, and polished. Reference areas were created and specimens were divided into six groups. They were exposed to 0.01 M HCl (pH 2) for 2 min, followed by immersion for 1 min in one of the following test suspensions: magnesium hydroxide, aluminum hydroxide, magnesium hydroxide/aluminum hydroxide, sodium alginate/sodium bicarbonate/calcium carbonate, or hydrated magnesium aluminate. Artificial saliva was used as a negative control. Specimens were subjected to a total of five cycles of erosion/antacid treatment. Enamel surface loss was measured (in micrometers) by optical profilometry. In addition, baseline and final surface microhardness (SMH) values of enamel were obtained. It was found that antacid suspensions significantly reduced enamel loss, and that similar protection was afforded by all formulations. No differences were observed between the final enamel SMH values among groups. Antacid suspensions counteracted HCl-induced enamel loss, although they were not effective in reducing enamel softening. Mouth rinsing with antacid suspensions after vomiting can potentially represent a promising strategy to counteract enamel loss caused by erosion.
