Filiz KEYF, S.Hakan TUNA, Agnes SAFRANY, Murat ŞEN

Water Sorption and Solubility of Different Luting and Restorative Dental Cements

Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the water sorption and solubility of four provisional, three permanent luting cements and five restorative cements. Methods: A split ring mould was fabricated for the preparation of specimen discs which were 15.0 mm in diameter and 1.5 mm thick. All specimens were manipulated according to the manufacturer's instructions and then subjected to water sorption and solubility tests. Data were analysed with Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test. Scanning electron microscopy was used to evaluate surface topography and roughness. Results: All tested materials demonstrated different degrees of sorption and solubility. The difference between sorption and solubility was statistically significant. Some materials were retained water in their structure and thus were compensated the loss of mass due to dissolution. It was found that zinc phosphate and zinc polycarboxylate cements were the most stable materials for solubility and sorption. Conclusion: The most important properties of cements are their solubility and resistance to disintegration in saliva. This is an important concern for clinicians. If the cement dissolves or deteriorates under a restoration, leakage can result in sensitivity and caries in clinic and patients suffer from toothache.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Water sorption, solubility, provisional cement, permenant luting cement, restorative cement

Water Sorption and Solubility of Different Luting and Restorative Dental Cements

Keywords:

Water sorption, solubility, provisional cement, permenant luting cement, restorative cement,

PDF

___

Murakomi H, Matsuya Y, Matsuya S. Dissolution mechanism of zinc phosphate dental cement in acetic and lactic acid buffers. Biomaterials 1990; 11: 435-440. 9. Cattani-Lorente MA, Godin C, Meyer JM. Mechanical behavior of glass ionomer cements affected by long–term storage in water. Dent Mater 1994; 10: 37-44.
Mesu FP. Degradation of luting cements measured in vitro. J Dent Res 1982; 61: 665-672.
Mitra SB, Kedrowski BL. Long-term mechanical properties of glass ionomers. Dent Mater 1994; 10: 78-82.
Uno S, Finger WJ, Fritz U. Long-term mechanical characteristics of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Dental Mater 1996; 12: 64-69.
Macorra JC, Praides G. Conventional and adhesive luting cements. Clin Oral Invest 2002; 6: 198-204.
Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. Mosby Co. Second ed. St Louis, Missorui 1999.
McLean JW Clinical applications of glass ionomer cements. Oper Dent 1992; 17: 184-190.
Knibbs PJ, Walls AWG. A laboratory and clinical evaluation of three dental luting cements. J Oral Rehabil 1989; 16: 467-473.
Earl MSA, Ibbetson RJ. The clinical disintegration of a glass- ionomer cement. British Dent J 1986; 161: 287-291.
Negm MN, Beech DR, Grant AA. An evaluation of mechanical and adhesive properties of polycarboxylate and glass ionomer cements. J Oral Rehabil 1982; 9: 161-167.
Hersek N, Canay S. Invivo solubility of three types of luting cement. Quint Int 1996; 27: 211-216.
Macorra JC, Praides G. Conventional and adhesive luting cements. Clin Oral Invest 2002; 6: 198-204.
Craig RG, Powers JM, Wataha JC. Dental materials properties and manipulation. Mosby, Inc. Seventh ed. St.Louis, Missouri, 2000.