IADR 95th

21/75

-21-Fuji II LC0193 µTBSof RM-GIC on DemineralizedRoot Dentin With Several ConditionersOral Presentation11:00 AM–11:15 AM Mar 22, 2017CC, Room 2018 Authors:Authors:AmrSaad(Presenter)Tokyo Medical and Dental UniversityGo Inoue, Tokyo Medical and Dental UniversityJunjiAtomura, Tokyo Medical and Dental UniversityToru Nikaido, Tokyo Medical and Dental UniversityJunjiTagami, Tokyo Medical and Dental UniversityAbstract: Abstract: Objectives: Evaluation of microtensilebond strength (µTBS) of resin-modified glass ionomercement (RM-GIC) to sound and artificial demineralizedroot dentin (ADRD) using three different conditioning materials and a self-etch primer after both 24 hours and three months.Methods: Specimens were created by cutting bovine root dentin and embedding it in epoxy resin, for the ADRD specimens, artificial carious lesions were created, then the RM-GIC (Fuji II LC) was applied directly on the smear layer (No treatment) or after application of Self Conditioner (SC), Cavity Conditioner (CC), or ClearfilSE bond primer (SE) according to the manufacturer’s Cavity Conditioner (CC), or ClearfilSE bond primer (SE) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, or 17% EDTA applied for 60 seconds, on both ADRD and sound dentin, then RM-GIC was light cured and stored in artificial saliva for 24 hours or three months. Specimens were cut into sticks for µTBStest, and the failure mode was examined using SEM.Results: Mean µTBSvalues (MPa) and standard deviations in are shown in the Table, Three way ANOVA (p=0.05) showed that the RMGI bond strength values after the two storage periods were significantly affected by the dentin substrate as well as the conditioning material, both SE and SC had the highest and most stable bond strength values, while CC showed stable bond strength values with sound dentin on storage, SE, SC and CC showed significantly higher values (p<0.05) values with sound dentin on storage, SE, SC and CC showed significantly higher values (p<0.05) than all the no treatment groups. EDTA conditioning showed significant reduction in bond strength after three months with sound dentin, while with ADRD it showed 100% pretest failure for both storage periods.Conclusions: The effect of dentin conditioning on bond strength of RM-GIC depended on materials and the type of dentin, the “priming” approach with SE and SC shows the highest bond strength values, while 17% EDTA is not suitable conditioner for RM-GIC with root dentin.Table(s):NonCCSCEDTASE primer13.4±2.318.5±3.3 [A]26.6 ±4.4 [B]21.5±3.5 [A]34.68±5.2 [D]-78%-91%-100% (100%)-100%4.34±1.5 [C]17.1±5.5 [A]25.3±3.9 [B]4.6±1.6 [C]34.6±3.1 [D]-30%-89%-100%-35%-100%7.2±1.911.9±2.2 [b]14.6±3.3 [a,f]n.d12.3±2 [b,f,e]-55%-85%-100%0%-100%ADRD 3m4.5±1.98.9±2 [d]14.1±3.5 [a]n.d11.7±1.5 [d,e]-50%-85%-100%0%-100%Sound 24hSound 3mADRD 24hStudent PresenterDisclosure Statement:The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: NoneI have read the IADR policy on licensing.Signed by amrsaadReprinted with permission from the Journal of Dental Research, J Dent Res 96 (Spec Iss A):-21-abstract number 0193, https://iadr2017.zerista.com/event/member/329665, 2017