Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 05 Nov 2024

Effect of Surface Treatments on Shear-bond Strength of Glass Ionomer Cements to Silver Diamine Fluoride-treated Simulated Carious Dentin

,
,
, and
Page Range: 714 – 724
DOI: 10.2341/23-161-L
Save
Download PDF

SUMMARY

Objectives:

This study investigated the effect of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) and failure modes of self-cured (SC) and light-cured (LC) high-viscosity glass ionomer cements (HVGICs) to silver diamine fluoride (SDF)-treated simulated carious dentin (SCD).

Methods and Materials:

Extracted human premolars were sectioned and pH cycled for 10 days to simulate carious dentin. The demineralized specimens were treated with 38% SDF (Riva Star) for 2 minutes, washed, stored in deionized distilled water at 37°C for 2 weeks, and subjected to the following surface treatments (n=14): T1 – no treatment (control); T2 – 10 seconds polyacrylic acid (PAA); T3 – 5 seconds phosphoric acid (PPA); T4 – 5 seconds PPA plus universal adhesive (Zipbond); and T5 – 5 seconds PPA plus resin-modified GIC adhesive (Riva bond LC). SC (Riva Self-cure HV) and LC (Riva Light-cure HV) HVGICs were applied to the conditioned specimens and stored in artificial saliva at 37°C for 1 week. SBS and failure modes were subsequently determined. Statistical analyses were performed using Kruskal-Wallis/post-hoc Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests (α=0.05).

Results:

The highest SBS was observed when SC and LC were restored with T2 and T5, respectively. Significant differences in SBS were as follows: SC – T2, T1 > T5, T3; LC – T5, T4, T3 > T2. SC generally exhibited adhesive failures, while LC presented both adhesive and mixed failures.

Conclusion:

The preferred method for preparing SDF-treated carious dentin before restoration application is PAA for SC and PPA plus RMGIC adhesive for LC HVGICs.

Copyright: 2024
Figure 1
Figure 1

Bar graph of distribution of failure modes for the various surface treatments, Number (%). Abbreviations: T1, control; T2, Riva Conditioner; T3, Super Etch; T4, Super Etch + Zipbond; T5, Super Etch + Riva Bond LC; SC, Riva HV self-cure; LC, Riva HV light-cure.


Figure 2
Figure 2

EDX Spectroscopy from all eight different groups. Note that Ag was detected in all the treatment groups. Abbreviations: T1, control; T2, Riva Conditioner; T3, Super Etch; T4, Super Etch + Zipbond; T5, Super Etch + Riva Bond LC; SC, Riva HV self-cure; LC, Riva HV light-cure.


Figure 3
Figure 3

SEM images from all 8 groups. Arrow shows resin tag formation. (a) SC with dentin treated without any surface treatment; (b) SC with dentin treated with PAA; (c) SC with dentin treated with PPA; (d) SC with dentin treated with PPA and Riva bond LC; (e) LC with dentin treated with PAA; (f) LC with dentin treated with PPA; (g) LC with dentin treated with PPA and Zipbond; (h) LC with dentin treated with PPA and Riva bond LC.


Contributor Notes

*Corresponding author: Faculty of Dentistry, University Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; e-mail: yotumdental@um.edu.my
Accepted: 06 Jul 2024
  • Download PDF