International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 5 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2015 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Influence of Different Ceramic Systems on the Polymerization of Dual-cured Resin Cement evaluated Immediately and after 24 Hours: An in vitro Study

Nikhil V Jain, Ramandeep Dugal, Gaurav R Poplai, Affaf A Gharatkar, Purva H Shinde

Citation Information : Jain NV, Dugal R, Poplai GR, Gharatkar AA, Shinde PH. Influence of Different Ceramic Systems on the Polymerization of Dual-cured Resin Cement evaluated Immediately and after 24 Hours: An in vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2015; 5 (1):1-9.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1121

Published Online: 01-03-2015

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2015; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Background

To check the influence of different all-ceramic systems on the polymerization of a dual-cured resin cement, evaluated immediately and 24 hours after curing cycle.

Materials and methods

A total of 80 resin cement disk specimens (n = 20) were fabricated by polymerization through lithium disilicate disks (group B), leucite-reinforced disks (group C), zirconia disks (group D) and without an intervening ceramic disk (group A). Each group further consisted of two subgroups (n = 10), t30 and t60 according to two different exposure times of 30 and 60 seconds respectively. Each of the 80 resin disk specimens was evaluated for microhardness (VHN) immediately and after 24 hours, giving us a total of 160 readings. One way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used for multiple group comparisons followed by Tukey's post-hoc for group-wise comparisons.

Results

Direct activation (group A) of the resin cement showed statistically significant higher mean microhardness values as compared to the experimental groups (groups B, C and D), both immediately and after 24 hours. The mean microhardness for immediate postactivation was always inferior to the 24 hours postactivation test for both direct activation and through different ceramics. For immediate testing time, of both the 30 and 60 seconds curing cycle, there was a significant increase in the microhardness of the resin cement disks cured for 60 seconds through the different ceramics (groups B, C and D) and direct light activation (group A). For the 24 hours testing time, of both the 30 and 60 seconds curing cycle, there was a significant increase in the microhardness of the resin cement disks cured for 60 seconds through the different ceramics except for the direct light-activation group.

Conclusion

Ceramic composition affected the polymerization of dual-cured resin cements. Doubling the light irradiation time significantly increased mean microhardness value. Greater degree of conversion leading to an increase in hardness was observed when the resin cement disks were evaluated after 24 hours.

How to cite this article

Jain NV, Dugal R, Madanshetty P, Poplai GR, Gharatkar AA, Shinde PH. Influence of Different Ceramic Systems on the Polymerization of Dual-cured Resin Cement evaluated Immediately and after 24 Hours. An in vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2015;5(1):1-9.


PDF Share
  1. An update of ceramics in dentistry. Int J Clin Dent 2;(4).
  2. Ceramics for dental applications: a review. Materials 2010;3:351-368.
  3. Influence of zirconia base and shade difference on polymerization efficiency of dual-cure resin cement. J Prosthodont 2011 Jul;20(5):361-365.
  4. Luting cement, the stronghold or the weak link in ceramic restorations? Adv Eng Mater 2001;3(10):763-767.
  5. ‘Science of dental materials”. 10th ed. Philadel- phia: WB Saunder; 1996. p. 85-102.
  6. The influence of cements on the mechanical per- formance of dental ceramics. Bioceramics 1992;5(2):317-324.
  7. The strengthening mechanism of resin cements on porcelain surfaces. J Dent Res 2006;85(3):272-276.
  8. Strength of a dental glass-ceramic after surface coating. Dent Mater 1993;9(4):274-279.
  9. Matinlinna ‘Adhesion aspects in dentistry”. Leiden, Boston: Brill Academic Pub; 2009. p. 121-138.
  10. Comparison of photo-activation versus chemical or dual-curing of resin- based luting cements regarding flexural strength, modulus and surface hardness. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28(11):1022-1028.
  11. Conversion of dual cure luting cements. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22(1):43-47.
  12. Chemical versus dual curing of resin inlay cements. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73(6): 515-524.
  13. Influence of curing light attenuation caused by aesthetic indirect restorative materials on resin cement polymerization. Eur J Dent 2010 Jul;4(3):314-323.
  14. Hardening of a dual-cure resin cement using QTH and LED curing units. J Appl Oral Sci 2010 Mar-Apr;18(2):110-115.
  15. Effect of light source and time on the polymerization of resin cement through ceramic veneers. J Prosthodont 2001;10(3):133139.
  16. Influence of ceramic translucency on curing efficacy of different light-curing units. J Adhes Dent 2007 Oct;9(5):449-462.
  17. Hardening of dual-cured cements under composite resin inlays. J Prosthet Dent 1991 Aug;66(2):187-192.
  18. Curing lights-the effcts of clinical factors on intensity and polymerization. SADJ 2002;57(5):181-186.
  19. Restorative resins: hardness and strength vs. quantity of remaining double bonds. Scand J Dent Res 1982;90(6):484-489.
  20. Depth of cure and compressive strength of dental composites cured with blue light emitting diodes (LEDs). Dent Mater 2000;16(1): 41-47.
  21. The effect of post curing on quantity of remaining double bonds, mechanical properties, and in vitro wear of two resin composites. J Dent 2000;28(6): 447-452.
  22. The micro- Raman spectroscopy, a useful tool to determine the degree of conversion of light-activated composite resins. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;48(5):675-681.
  23. Effect of light intensity on polymerization of three composite resins. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 1996;4(2):71-76.
  24. Microhardness of a resin cement polymerized by light-emitting diode and halogen lights through ceramic. J Prosthodont 2009 Jul;18(5):411-416.
  25. Correlation of parameters used to estimate monomer conversion in a light-cured composite. J Dent Res A 1988;67(6):932-937.
  26. Polymerization depths of contemporary light-curing units using microhard- ness. J Esthet Dent 2000;12(6):340-349.
  27. Influence of composite inlay/onlay thickness on hardening of dual-cured resin cements. J Can Dent Assoc 2000;66(3):147.
  28. Effect of veneering materials and curing methods on resin cement Knoop hardness. Braz Dent J 2007;18(3):235-239.
  29. Effect of curing protocol on the polymerization of dual-cured resin cements. Dent Mater 2010 Jul;26(7):710-718.
  30. Dual resin cement knoop hardness after different activation modes through dental ceramics. Braz Dent J 2010;21(2):104-110.
  31. Dent Mater 2008;24(5):594-599.
  32. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2010;93(1):122-127.
  33. Influence of polymerization mode on flexural properties of esthetic resin luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(6):549-554.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.