Evaluation of stainless steel crowns cemented with glass-ionomer and resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements.
Yücel Yılmaz, Sera Simsek, Anya Dalmiş, Taşkın Gürbüz, M Elcin Kocogullari
Abstract
Yücel Yılmaz, Sera Simsek, Anya Dalmiş, Taşkın Gürbüz, M Elcin Kocogullari
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate in vitro and in vivo conditions of stainless steel crowns (SSC) cemented using one luting glass-ionomer cement (Aqua Meron) and one luting resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer). METHODS: In the in vitro part of this study, retentive properties of SSCs cemented using Aqua Meron and Vitremer on extracted primary first molars were tested. In addition, two specimens of each group were used to evaluate the tooth hard tissue-cement, within the cement itself, cement-SSC, and tooth hard tissue-cement-SSC under scanning electron microscope (SEM). In the in vivo part of this study, 152 SSCs were placed on the first or second primary molars of 86 children, and cemented using either Aqua Meron or Vitremer. The crowns were examined for retention. In addition, the clinical views of the crowns were recorded with an intraoral camera. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the mean retentive forces of Aqua Meron and Vitremer (P> 0.05). SSCs cemented with Aqua Meron and Vitremer had an average lifespan of 26.44 and 24.07 months respectively. Only one (0.66%) of 152 SSCs was lost from the Aqua Meron group during post-cementation periods. Nineteen of the 152 SSCs (12.5%) had dents or perforations.
OpenAlex reports 25 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.
PURPOSE: To evaluate in vitro and in vivo conditions of stainless steel crowns (SSC) cemented using one luting glass-ionomer cement (Aqua Meron) and one luting resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer). METHODS: In the in vitro part of this study, retentive properties of SSCs cemented using Aqua Meron and Vitremer on extracted primary first molars were tested. In addition, two specimens of each group were used to evaluate the tooth hard tissue-cement, within the cement itself, cement-SSC, and tooth hard tissue-cement-SSC under scanning electron microscope (SEM). In the in vivo part of this study, 152 SSCs were placed on the first or second primary molars of 86 children, and cemented using either Aqua Meron or Vitremer. The crowns were examined for retention. In addition, the clinical views of the crowns were recorded with an intraoral camera. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the mean retentive forces of Aqua Meron and Vitremer (P> 0.05). SSCs cemented with Aqua Meron and Vitremer had an average lifespan of 26.44 and 24.07 months respectively. Only one (0.66%) of 152 SSCs was lost from the Aqua Meron group during post-cementation periods. Nineteen of the 152 SSCs (12.5%) had dents or perforations.
Key concepts: Glass ionomer cement, Cementation (geology), Materials science, Cement, Molar, Dentistry, Composite material, Significant difference