Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2017; 11(01): 058-063
DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_113_16
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

“Ormocer an innovative technology”: A replacement for conventional cements and veneer? A comparative in vitro analysis

Vini Rajeev
1   Department of Prosthodontics, AIMST University, Kedah, Malaysia
,
Rajeev Arunachalam
2   Department of Periodontics, AIMST University, Kedah, Malaysia
,
Sanjna Nayar
3   Department of Prosthodontics, Sree Balaji Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
P. R. Arunima
4   Department of Periodontics, PMS Dental College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
,
Sivadas Ganapathy
5   Department of Pedodontics, AIMST University, Kedah, Malaysia
,
Vaishnavi Vedam
6   Department of Oral Pathology, AIMST University, Kedah, Malaysia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
25 September 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: This in vitro study was designed to assess shear bond strength (SBS) of ormocer flowable (OF) resin as a luting agent, ormocer as an indirect veneer material with portrayal of modes of failures using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Materials and Methods: Sixty maxillary central incisors were divided into Group I, II, and III with 20 samples each based on luting cement used. They were OF, self-adhesive (SA) cement, and total etch (TE) cement. These groups were subdivided into “a” and “b” of ten each based on the type of veneering materials used. Veneer discs were fabricated using Ormocer restorative (O) and pressable ceramic (C). Specimens were thermocycled and loaded under universal testing machine for SBS. The statistical analysis was done using one-way ANOVA post hoc Tukey honest significant difference method. Results: A significant difference was observed between the Groups I and II (P < 0.05). The highest mean bond strength when using ormocer veneer was obtained with the Group Ia (19.11 ± 1.92 Mpa) and lowest by Group IIa (8.1 ± 1.04 Mpa), whereas the highest mean bond strength while using ceramic veneer was of similar range for Group Ib (18.04 ± 4.08 Mpa) and Group IIIb (18.07 ± 1.40 Mpa). SEM analysis revealed OF and TE presented mixed type of failure when compared with SA where failure mode was totally adhesive. Conclusion: OF was found equally efficient like TE. Bond strength of ormocer as a veneer was not inferior to ceramic making it one of the promising additions in the field of dentistry.

Key words:

Adhesive dentistry - luting cements - ormocer - shear bond strength
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Akgungor G, Akkayan B, Gaucher H. Influence of ceramic thickness and polymerization mode of a resin luting agent on early bond strength and durability with a lithium disilicate-based ceramic system. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 94: 234-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Griggs JA. Recent advances in materials for all-ceramic restorations. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 51: 713-27 viii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Clifford M. Sturdevant. Sturdevant's Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 4th ed. Mosby, Orlando, Florida, USA: 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Hikita K, Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Ikeda T, Van Landuyt K, Maida T. et al. Bonding effectiveness of adhesive luting agents to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 71-80
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Erdilek D, Dörter C, Koray F, Kunzelmann KH, Efes BG, Gomec Y. Effect of thermo-mechanical load cycling on microleakage in class II ormocer restorations. Eur J Dent 2009; 3: 200-5
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Taher NM. Comparative study of composite, compomers and ormocer biaxial flexural strength. Saudi Dent J 2002; 14: 7-10
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Kumar KS, Rao CH, Reddy KB, Chidambaram S, Girish H, Murgod S. Flowable composite an alternative orthodontic bonding adhesive: An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013; 14: 883-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Saunders SA. Current practicality of nanotechnology in dentistry. Part 1: Focus on nanocomposite restoratives and biomimetics. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2009; 1: 47-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sivakumar A, Valiathan A. Dental ceramics and ormocer technology-navigating the future. Trends Biomater Artif Organs 2006; 20: 40-3
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Ajlouni R, Bishara SE, Soliman MM, Oonsombat C, Laffoon JF, Warren J. The use of ormocer as an alternative material for bonding orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod 2005; 75: 106-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Celik C, Yuzugullu B, Erkut S, Yamanel K. Effects of mouth rinses on color stability of resin composites. Eur J Dent 2008; 2: 247-53
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Holderegger C, Sailer I, Schuhmacher C, Schläpfer R, Hämmerle C, Fischer J. Shear bond strength of resin cements to human dentin. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 944-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Frankenberger R, Lopes M, Perdigão J, Ambrose WW, Rosa BT. The use of flowable composites as filled adhesives. Dent Mater 2002; 18: 227-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Pavan S, dos Santos PH, Berger S, Bedran-Russo AK. The effect of dentin pretreatment on the microtensile bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104: 258-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Moszner N, Salz U, Zimmermann J. Chemical aspects of self-etching enamel-dentin adhesives: A systematic review. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 895-910
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Anchieta RB, Rocha EP, de Almeida EO, Junior AC, Martini AP. Bonding all-ceramic restorations with two resins cement techniques: A clinical report of three-year follow-up. Eur J Dent 2011; 5: 478-85
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 AEl Zohairy AA, Saber MH, Abdalla AI, Feilzer AJ. Efficacy of microtensile versus microshear bond testing for evaluation of bond strength of dental adhesive systems to enamel. Dent Mater 2010; 26: 848-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Roulet JF, Vanherle G. Adhesive Technology for Restorative Dentistry. Proceedings from. 3rd ed. European symposium on Adhesive Technology. Quintessence publishing company; Chicago, USA: 2005: 125
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Belli R, Guimarães JC, Filho AM, Vieira LC. Post-etching cleaning and resin/ceramic bonding: Microtensile bond strength and EDX analysis. J Adhes Dent 2010; 12: 295-303
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Blatz MB, Sadan A, Kern M. Resin-ceramic bonding: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 89: 268-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Viotti RG, Kasaz A, Pena CE, Alexandre RS, Arrais CA, Reis AF. Microtensile bond strength of new self-adhesive luting agents and conventional multistep systems. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 102: 306-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar