A laboratory and clinical evaluation of three dental luting cements
P J Knibbs, Angus W. G. Walls
Abstract
P J Knibbs, Angus W. G. Walls
Abstract
The loss of material from specimens of three luting cements was measured after continuous erosion cycling in the laboratory. The glass ionomer luting cement showed significantly less material loss than the zinc polycarboxylate and zinc phosphate luting cements. Two hundred and fifty restorations cemented with one of the three materials were studied clinically for marginal integrity and retention over 3.5 years. The data were tested using survival analysis. Zinc phosphate cement gave the best clinical performance. Possible explanations for the poor correlation between the findings in the laboratory and clinical study are discussed.
OpenAlex reports 23 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The loss of material from specimens of three luting cements was measured after continuous erosion cycling in the laboratory. The glass ionomer luting cement showed significantly less material loss than the zinc polycarboxylate and zinc phosphate luting cements. Two hundred and fifty restorations cemented with one of the three materials were studied clinically for marginal integrity and retention over 3.5 years. The data were tested using survival analysis. Zinc phosphate cement gave the best clinical performance. Possible explanations for the poor correlation between the findings in the laboratory and clinical study are discussed.
Key concepts: Zinc phosphate, Cement, Dentistry, Glass ionomer cement, Dental cement, Zinc, Materials science, Luting agent