Reducing composite restoration polymerization shrinkage stress through resin modified glass‐ionomer based adhesives

• Published in: Australian dental journal Vol. 60; no. 4; pp. 490 - 496
• Main Authors: Naoum, SJ, Mutzelburg, PR, Shumack, TG, Thode, DJG, Martin, FE, Ellakwa, AE
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Australia 01-12-2015
• Subjects: Acrylic Resins; Adhesives - chemistry; Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate - chemistry; Composite Resins - chemistry; Dental Bonding; Dental Cements - chemistry; Dental Materials - chemistry; Dentine bonding; Dentistry; Glass Ionomer Cements - chemistry; Humans; Materials Testing; Methacrylates - chemistry; Polymerization; polymerization shrinkage; Resin Cements - chemistry; resin composite; resin modified glass‐ionomer; Riva Bond LC; Silicon Dioxide; resin modified glass-ionomer; Riva Bond LC; Dentine bonding; polymerization shrinkage; resin composite
• ISSN: 0045-0421; 1834-7819
• DOI: 10.1111/adj.12265

Background
The aim of this study was to determine whether employing resin modified glass‐ionomer based adhesives can reduce polymerization contraction stress generated at the interface of restorative composite adhesive systems.
Methods
Five resin based adhesives (G Bond, Optibond‐All‐in‐One, Optibond‐Solo, Optibond‐XTR and Scotchbond‐Universal) and two resin modified glass‐ionomer based adhesives (Riva Bond‐LC, Fuji Bond‐LC) were analysed. Each adhesive was applied to bond restorative composite Filtek‐Z250 to opposing acrylic rods secured within a universal testing machine. Stress developed at the interface of each adhesive‐restorative composite system (n = 5) was calculated at 5‐minute intervals over 6 hours.
Results
The resin based adhesive‐restorative composite systems (RBA‐RCS) demonstrated similar interface stress profiles over 6 hours; initial rapid contraction stress development (0–300 seconds) followed by continued contraction stress development ≤0.02MPa/s (300 seconds – 6 hours). The interface stress profile of the resin modified glass‐ionomer based adhesive‐restorative composite systems (RMGIBA‐RCS) differed substantially to the RBA‐RCS in several ways. Firstly, during 0–300 seconds the rate of contraction stress development at the interface of the RMGIBA‐RCS was significantly (p < 0.05) lower than at the interface of the RBA‐RCS. Secondly, at 300 seconds and 6 hours the interface contraction stress magnitude of the RMGIBA‐RCS was significantly (p < 0.05) lower than the stress of all assessed RBA‐RCS. Thirdly, from 300 seconds to 6 hours both the magnitude and rate of interface stress of the RMGIBA‐RCS continued to decline over the 6 hours from the 300 seconds peak.
Conclusions
The use of resin modified glass‐ionomer based adhesives can significantly reduce the magnitude and rate of polymerization contraction stress developed at the interface of adhesive‐restorative composite systems.