Shear bond strength of six restorative materials

The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the shear bond strength of a conventional glassionomer

cement, a resin modified glass-ionomer, a composite resin and three compomer restorative

materials. Dentin of the occlusal surfaces from sixty extracted human permanent molars were prepared

for shear bond strength testing. The specimens were randomly divided into six groups of 10 each. Dentinal

surfaces were treated according to the instructions of manufacturers for each material. Each restorative

material was placed inside nylon cylinders 2 mm high with an internal diameter of 3 mm, which were

placed perpendicular to dentin surfaces. Shear bond strengths were determined using an Universal Testing

Machine at crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min in a compression mode. Conventional glass-ionomer,

Ketac-Molar aplicap showed the lowest mean shear bond strength 3.77 ± 1.76 (X ± SD MPa) and the

composite resin, Heliomolar showed the highest mean shear bond strength 16.54 ± 1.65 while the mean

bond strength of Fuji II LC was 9.55 ± 1.06. The shear bond strengths of compomer restorative materials

were 12.83 ± 1.42, 10.64 ± 1.42 and 11.19 ± 1.19 for Compoglass, Hytac and Dyract respectively.

ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in the mean shear bond strengths of all groups

(P<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found between the three compomer materials

(P>0.5). Ketac-Molar and composite resin showed statistically significant difference (P<0.0005). The

mode of fracture varied between materials. It is concluded that the compomer restorative materials show

higher shear bond strength than conventional glass-ionomer and resin modified glass-ionomer, but less

than composite resin. The fracture mode is not related to the shear bond strengths values.

1. Wilson AD, Kent BE. The glass ionomer cement: A new translu-cent dental filling material. J Appl Chem Biotechnol 21: 313, 1971.

2. Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for dentistry. Br Dent J 2: 133-135, 1972.

3. Davison CL, Mjor IA.Advances in glass-ionomer cements. Quin-tessence Publishing Co, Inc, Chicago; 1999.

4. Hirota K, Akahane S, Tosaki S, Tamiya Y, Tomioka K. Thermal expansion coefficient of glass-ionomer cements (abstract # 225). J Dent Res 67 (Spec Iss):141, 1988.

5. Suzuki Y, Tosaki S, Hirota K. Physical properties of glass-ionomer for restorative filling (abstract # 1282). J Dent Res 74: 561, 1995.

6. Yoshii E, Kanaoka T, Hirota K. Biological evaluation of a new light cured glass-ionomer cement for restorative filling. Forth World Biomaterials Congress; 1992.

7. Swift EJ, Pawlus MA, Vargas MA. Shear bond strength of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials. Oper Dent 20: 138-143, 1995.

8. Sidhu SK. Marginal contraction gap formation of light-cured glass ionomers. Am J Dent 7: 115-118, 1994.

9. Salama FS, Riad MI, Abdel Megid FY. Microleakage and mar-ginal gap formation of glass ionomer resin restorations. J Clin Pediatr Dent 20: 31-37, 1995.

10. Carvalho RM, Yoshiyama M, Horner JA, Pashley DH. Bonding mechanism of Variglass to dentin. Am J Dent 8: 253-58, 1995.

11. Dyract®:A single-component compomer. Dyract Manual Version II, De Trey Dentsply, pp 4-29, 1994.

12. Barnes DM, Blank LN, Gingell JC, Barnes CA. A clinical evalu-ation of Dyract light cured compomer restorative (abstract # 2205). J Dent Res 75 (Spec Iss): 293, 1996.

13. Manhart J, Chen HY, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R. Bond strength of a compomer to dentin under various surface conditions. Clin Oral Investig 99: 175-180, 1999.

14. Peutzfeldt A. Compomers and glass ionomers: bond strength to dentin and mechanical properties. Am J Dent 9: 259-263, 1996.

15. Smith DC. Composition and characteristics of glass ionomer cements. J Am Dent Assc 120: 20-23, 1990.

16. McCaghren RA, Retief DH, Bradley EL, Denys FR. Shear bond strength of light-cured glass ionomer to enamel and dentin. J Dent Res 69: 40-45, 1990.

17. Levartovsky S, Goldstein GR, Georgescu M. Shear bond strength of several new core materials. J Prosth Dent 75: 154-158, 1996.

18. Burgess JO, Burkett L. Shear bond strength of four glass ionomers to enamel and dentin (abstract # 2276). J Dent Res 72 (Spec Iss): 388, 1993.

19. Pawlus M, Swift E, Vargus M. Shear bond strengths of resin ionomer restorative materials (abstract # 1812). J Dent Res 73 (Spec Iss): 328, 1994.

20. Bell RB, Barkmeier W. Shear bond strength of glass ionomer restoratives and liners (abstract # 1181). J Dent Res 73 (Spec Iss): 328, 1994.

21. Burgess J, Norling B, Summitt J. Resin ionomer restorative mate-rials: The new generation. J Esthet Dent 6: 207-215, 1994.

22. Futatsuki M, Nakata M. In vitro marginal leakage of class II composite resin restorations by thermal cycling. J Clin Pediatr Dent 18: 191-196, 1994.

23. Sidhu SK, Watson TF. Resin-modified glass ionomer materials. Am J Dent 8: 59-67, 1995.

24. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Gingell JC, Gilner PP. A clinical evalua-tion of a resin-modified glass ionomer restorative material. J Am Dent Assoc 126: 41-49, 1995.

25. Erickson RL, Glasspoole EA. Bonding to tooth structure: a com-parison of glass-ionomer and composite-resin systems. J Esthet Dent 6: 227-243, 1994.

26. Craig RG, Power JM, Walaha JC. Dental materials-properties and manipulation. 7 th ed, Mosby, St. Louis, 2000.

27. Friedl KH, Powers JM, Hiller K A. Influence of different factors on bond strength of hybrid ionomers. Oper Dent 20: 74-80, 1995.

28. Mitra S. Curing reactions of glass ionomer materials. Proceed-ings of the 2nd international symposium on glass-ionomers, Philadelphia, 1994.