journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138

Available online at [Link]

journal homepage: [Link]/journals/jden

Influence of temporary cement contamination on the

surface free energy and dentine bond strength of
self-adhesive cements

Masayuki Takimoto, Ryo Ishii, Masayoshi Iino, Yusuke Shimizu, Akimasa Tsujimoto,
Toshiki Takamizawa, Susumu Ando, Masashi Miyazaki *
Department of Operative Dentistry, Nihon University School of Dentistry, 1-8-13, Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo 101-8310, Japan

article info abstract

Article history: Objectives: The surface free energy and dentine bond strength of self-adhesive cements
Received 21 August 2011 were examined after the removal of temporary cements.
Received in revised form Methods: The labial dentine surfaces of bovine mandibular incisors were wet ground with
11 November 2011 #600-grit SiC paper. Acrylic resin blocks were luted to the prepared dentine surfaces using
Accepted 14 November 2011 HY Bond Temporary Cement Hard (HY), IP Temp Cement (IP), Fuji TEMP (FT) or Freegenol
Temporary Cement (TC), and stored for 1 week. After removal of the temporary cements
with an ultrasonic tip, the contact angle values of five specimens per test group were
Keywords: determined for the three test liquids, and the surface-energy parameters of the dentine
Bond strength surfaces were calculated. The dentine bond strengths of the self-adhesive cements were
Self-adhesive cement measured after removal of the temporary cements in a shear mode at a crosshead speed of
Surface free energy 1.0 mm/min. The data were subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by
Temporary cement Tukey’s HSD test.
Results: For all surfaces, the value of the estimated surface tension component g dS (disper-
sion) was relatively constant at 41.7–43.3 mJ m2. After removal of the temporary cements,
the value of the g hS (hydrogen-bonding) component decreased, particularly with FT and TC.
The dentine bond strength of the self-adhesive cements was significantly higher for those
without temporary cement contamination (8.2–10.6 MPa) than for those with temporary
cement contamination (4.3–7.1 MPa).
Conclusions: The gS values decreased due to the decrease of g hS values for the temporary
cement-contaminated dentine. Contamination with temporary cements led to lower den-
tine bond strength.
Clinical significance: The presence of temporary cement interferes with the bonding perfor-
mance of self-adhesive cements to dentine. Care should be taken in the methods of removal
of temporary cement when using self-adhesive cements.
# 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

the formation of durable bonds between resin-based luting

1. Introduction cements and dentine tissues to achieve clinical success.1,2
Recent attempts to simplify the pretreatment procedures for
There is increasing demand for tooth-coloured indirect tooth surfaces have led to the development of self-adhesive
restorations for anterior and posterior lesions, which require resin cements.3,4 These are based on acidic functional

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 3 3219 8141; fax: +81 3 3219 8347.
E-mail address: miyazaki-m@[Link] (M. Miyazaki).
0300-5712/$ – see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2011.11.012
132 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138

monomers, fillers and initiator systems. Self-adhesive cements The current study examined the influence of temporary
can bond to smear layer-covered dentine without pretreatment, cement contamination on the surface free energy of dentine
thereby simplifying the clinical procedures. However, limited surfaces. The shear bond strength to bovine dentine was also
etching potential and superficial interactions with dentine have examined for self-adhesive resin cements after removal of the
been reported for some self-adhesive cements.5–7 temporary cements. The null hypothesis was that the surface
During the fabrication of indirect restorations, it is free energy and dentine bond strength of self-adhesive resin
necessary to employ provisional restorations that are attached cements were not affected by temporary cement contamina-
with temporary cement in order to avoid infection, tooth tion.
sensitivity and tooth movement. These temporary cements
must be removed from the dentine surface prior to definitive
cementation; however, it is difficult to eliminate all of the 2. Materials and methods
materials from the dentine surface.8 The presence of residual
temporary cements and debris on prepared abutment teeth 2.1. Materials tested
might have a negative effect on the performance of definitive
self-adhesive cements by interfering with the penetration of The temporary cements used were HY Bond Temporary
adhesive monomers into the tooth substrate. Previous studies Cement Hard (HY) and IP Temp Cement (IP) from Shofu Inc.
have examined the effects of the application of temporary (Kyoto, Japan), and Fuji TEMP (FT) and Freegenol Temporary
cements on the bond strength of subsequent tooth-coloured Cement (TC) from GC Corp. (Tokyo, Japan), as shown in Table
restorations to dentine.9,10 Although bond strength data are 1. The self-adhesive cements used were Clearfil SA Luting (SA)
available for dentine contaminated with temporary cements, from Kuraray Medical Inc. (Tokyo, Japan), and G-Luting (GL)
little is known about the influence of the chemical character- and G-CEM (GC) from GC Corp., as shown in Table 2.
istics of the adherend surface.
The strength of the bond formed between the dentine and 2.2. Surface free-energy measurement
the luting cement depends on several factors, including the
characteristics and wetting of the adherend surface.11,12 The Mandibular incisors that had been extracted from cattle aged
wetting of the adherend surface by the luting cement can be 2–3 years were used as a substitute for human teeth. After
evaluated using the contact angle. Measurements of the removing the roots using a slow-speed saw with a diamond-
contact angle on the adherent surfaces provide information impregnated disk (Isomet; Buehler Ltd., Lake Bluff, USA), the
about the surface free energy in relation to the bonding pulp was removed, and the pulp chamber of each tooth was
characteristics of the solids.13 The surface free energy of a filled with cotton to avoid penetration of the embedding
solid (gS) is defined as the sum of the dispersion, hydrogen- media. Each tooth was then mounted in self-curing acrylic
bonding and polar forces.14 The dispersion force (g dS ) repre- resin (Tray Resin II; Shofu Inc.) to expose the labial surface of
sents the London interactions between apolar molecules. The the dentine, and placed in tap water. The final finish was
p
polar (non-dispersion) force (g S ) represents the electric and accomplished by grinding the surface with wet #600-grit
metallic interactions, in addition to the dipolar interactions. silicon carbide paper.
The hydrogen-bonding force (g hS ) relates to the water and For the experimental groups, acrylic resin blocks simulat-
hydroxyl components. The hydration of the adherend surface ing the provisional restorations were luted to the dentine
is central to the wetting behaviour. It is therefore important to surfaces using temporary cements. After immersion in
determine the polar interactions, including the dipole-bond- distilled water at 37 8C for 1 week, the blocks were removed,
ing and hydrogen-bonding characteristics,15 for the interac- and the surfaces were cleaned with an ultrasonic scaler
tion with water. (Piezon Master 600; Electro Medical Systems, Switzerland) and

Table 1 – Temporary cements used.

Code Resin cement Main components Manufacturer
HY HY Bond Temporary Powder: zinc oxide, magnesia, silicon dioxide, HY agent, pigment Shofu Inc. (Kyoto, Japan)
Cement Hard Liquid: poly (acrylic acid-tricarboxylic acid) sodium salt, water
(P: 100814, L: 110353)

IP IP Temp Cement Powder: zinc oxide, magnesia, silicon dioxide, S-PRG filler Shofu Inc. (Kyoto, Japan)
(P: 110309, L: 110353) Liquid: poly (acrylic acid-tricarboxylic acid) sodium salt, water, phos-
phoric acid

FT Fuji TEMP (1008191) A: fluoro-alumino-silicate glass, water, glycerine, silicon dioxide, GC Corp. (Tokyo, Japan)
paraben
B: barium sulphate, water, silicon dioxide, glycerine, polyacrylic acid,
paraben

TC Freegenol Base: zinc oxide, vegetable oil, petrolatum GC Corp. (Tokyo, Japan)
Temporary Cement Accelerator: ortho-ethoxybenzoic acid, carnauba wax, octanoic acid
(A: 0086, B: 0086)
S-PRG, surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer.
 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138 133

Table 2 – Self-adhesive cements tested.

Code Resin cement Main components Manufacturer
SA Clearfil SA Luting Paste A: Bis-GMA, TEGDMA, MDP, other methacrylate monomers, Kuraray Medical Inc.
(0042AA) silanated barium glass filler, silanated colloidal silica, (Tokyo, Japan)
dl-camphorquinone, benzoyl peroxide, others Paste B: Bis-GMA, other
methacrylate monomers, silanated barium glass filler, silanated colloidal
silica, surface treated sodium fluoride, accelerators, pigments

GL G-Luting (1004221) A: fluoro-alumino-silicate glass, UDMA, dimethacrylate, silicon dioxide, GC Corp.

initiator (Tokyo, Japan)
B: silicon dioxide, UDMA, dimethacrylate, phosphoric ester monomer,
initiator

GC G-Cem (1008271) Powder: fluoroaluminosilicate glass, initiators, pigments, others Liquid: GC Corp.
methacrylate ester, 4-MET, phosphate ester monomer, purified water, (Tokyo, Japan)
silica nano filler, initiators, others
Bis-GMA, 2,2bis[4-(2-hydrogen-3-methacryloyloxypropoxy)phenyl]propane; TEGDMA, triethylene glycol dimethacrylate; MDP, 10-methacry-
loyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate; CQ, dl-camphorquinone; UDMA, di(methacryloxyethyl)trimethylhexamethylene diurethane; 4-MET, 4-
methacryloxyethyl trimellitic acid.

Table 3 – Surface free-energy values for test liquids (mN mS1).

p
Liquid g dL gL g hL gL Manufacturer
1-Bromonaphthalene 44.4 0.2 0.0 44.6 Wako Pure Chemical Industries
Diiodomethane 46.8 4.0 0.0 50.8 Wako Pure Chemical Industries
Distilled water 29.1 1.3 42.4 72.8 –
p
g dL , Dispersion force; g L , polar force; g hL , hydrogen-bonding force; gL, total free energy of liquid.

rinsed with water until they were free of materials visible to By extending the Fowkes equation, the gSL is expressed as
1=2 p p 1=2 1=2
the naked eye. Specimens without temporary cement were g SL ¼ g L þ g S  2ðg dL g dS Þ  2ðg L g S Þ  2ðg hL g hS Þ
employed as controls. Sample size for each group was p p
g L ¼ g dL þ g L þ g hL ; g S ¼ g dS þ g S þ g hS ;
five.
The surface free energy of the dentine surface was where gd, gp and gh are components of the surface free energy
determined by measuring the contact angle on the surface (g) arising from the dispersion force, the polar (permanent and
for each of the three test liquids, 1-bromonaphthalen, induced) force and the hydrogen-bonding force, respectively.
diiodomethane and distilled water, with known surface- The u values were determined for the three test liquids, and
energy parameters (Table 3). The surface free energy of the the surface-energy parameters of the dentine surfaces were
set cements was also determined. Automatic measurements calculated based on the equations using add-on software and
of the contact angles were made using a Drop Master DM500 the interface measurement and analysis system (FAMAS;
apparatus (Kyowa Interface Science, Saitama, Japan) fitted Kyowa Interface Science).
with a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera (Fig. 1). Sessile
drops of each test liquid (1.0 ml) were dispensed with an 2.3. Bond-strength test
18-gauge Kateran needle to control the droplets at a certain
size, and placed on the tooth surface. Drop images The mandibular incisors were prepared as described for the
were acquired at 0.5 s after the test liquids were surface free-energy measurement. A piece of double-sided
dispenced. adhesive tape, with a 4-mm-diameter hole, was firmly
For each test liquid, the equilibrium contact angle (u) was attached to define the bonded area of the dentine. A Teflon
measured using the sessile-drop method for five specimens. All (Sanplatec Corp., Osaka, Japan) mould, 2.0 mm in height and
measurements were performed in a temperature controlled 4.0 mm in diameter, was used to shape the cement and to hold
room at 23  1 8C with relative humidity at 50  5%. The it in place on the dentine surface. The mixed cement was
surface-energy parameters of the solids were then determined condensed into the mould and light-cured for 30 s. The
based on the fundamental concepts of wetting.14 The Young– finished specimens were transferred to distilled water and
Dupré equation describes the work of adhesion for the solid (S) stored at 37 8C for 24 h.
and the liquid (L) that are in contact (WSL), the interfacial free Ten specimens per test group were tested in a shear mode
energy between the solid and the liquid (gSL), and the surface using a shear knife-edge testing apparatus in an Instron
free energy of the liquid and solid (gL and gS, respectively), as testing machine (Type 5500R; Instron Corp., Canton, MA, USA)
follows: at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. The shear bond-strength
WSL ¼ g L þ g S  g SL values (in MPa) were calculated from the peak load at failure
¼ g L ð1 þ cos uÞ: divided by the specimen surface area. After testing, the
134 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138

Fig. 1 – TH was present across the entire dentine surfaces, IP was present only on parts of the surfaces, and TP and FT were
largely absent, with the smear layer and smear plug visible.

specimens were examined under an optical microscope (SZH- then transferred to a critical-point dryer. The surfaces were
131; Olympus Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) at a magnification of 10 to coated in a vacuum evaporator (Quick Coater Type SC-701;
define the location of the bond failure. The type of failure was Sanyu Denshi Inc., Tokyo, Japan) with a thin film of gold (Au).
determined based on the percentage of substrate-free material The specimens were observed using a field-emission electron-
as adhesive failure, cohesive failure in composite or cohesive probe SEM (ERA-8800FE; Elionix Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) at an
failure in dentine. accelerating voltage of 10 kV.

2.4. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observation 2.5. Statistical analysis

Temporary cement-contaminated dentine surfaces were The results were analysed by calculating the mean and
observed under SEM. All of the SEM specimens were standard deviation for each date obtained. A statistical
dehydrated in ascending concentrations of tert-butanol, and analysis was performed to determine how the data were

Table 5 – Surface free energy and its components for set self-adhesive cements (mJ mS2).

Self-adhesive cement γSd γSp γSh γS

SA 42.4 (0.5) 2.6 (1.2) 9.0 (2.5) 54.0 (1.6)

GL 41.7 (0.3) 2.9 (1.2) 12.5 (1.5) 57.1 (1.9)

GC 42.0 (0.5) 2.5 (1.1) 24.5 (1.4) 69.0 (2.2)

N = 5, values in parenthesis indicate standard deviations. Values connected by horizontal lines showed no significant differences (P > 0.05). g dS ,
p
Dispersion force; g S , polarity; g hS , hydrogen bonding; gS, total surface free energy.
 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138 135

Table 4 – Influence of temporary cement contamination on surface free energy and its components for dentine surfaces
(mJ mS2).

Temporary cement γSd γSp γSh γS

Control 43.3 (0.7) 0.0 (0.0) 28.0 (2.5) 70.7 (3.1)

HY 42.3 (0.4) 1.9 (0.5) 20.5 (1.5) 64.7 (1.6)

IP 42.2 (0.5) 2.2 (0.4) 22.5 (1.4) 66.9 (1.6)

FT 42.1 (0.3) 2.0 (0.6) 9.4 (0.6) 54.5 (1.4)

TC 41.7 (0.3) 1.0 (0.5) 7.1 (1.1) 49.8 (1.0)

N = 5, values in parenthesis indicate standard deviations. Values connected by horizontal lines showed no significant differences (P > 0.05). g dS ,
p
Dispersion force; g S , polarity; g hS , hydrogen bonding; gS, total surface free energy.

influenced by the temporary cement contamination. Also, (41.7–43.3 mJ m2). The gS value decreased due to the
differences in the surface free energy for the set self-adhesive substantial decrease of the g hS value for the surfaces
cements were analysed. The data for each group were tested contaminated with temporary cements compared with the
for homogeneity of variance using Bartlett’s test, and then controls (without contamination). The gS value showed
subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed different responses depending upon the temporary cement
by Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) test at used: dentine surfaces contaminated by HY and IP had
a = 0.05. The statistical analysis was carried out with the significantly higher values than those contaminated with FT
Sigma Stat software system (Ver. 3.1; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, and TC.
USA). Table 5 shows the surface free energy and its components for
the set cements. There were no significant differences amongst
p
the g dS and g S values for the cements tested. However, the gS
3. Results value differed significantly amongst the cements (54.0 mJ m2
for SA, 57.1 mJ m2 for GL, and 69.0 mJ m2 for GC, respectively),
Table 4 shows the surface free energy and its components due to the substantial differences in the g hS values.
after removal of the temporary cements. For all of the Table 6 shows the shear bond strength of the self-adhesive
dentine surfaces, the g dS value remained relatively constant cements after removal of the temporary cements. The shear

Table 6 – Influence of temporary cement contamination on shear bond strength of self-adhesive cements to dentine.

Temporary cement Self-adhesive cement

SA GL GC

Control 10.6 (1.7) 9.3 (2.2) 7.3 (1.8)

[8/2/0] [8/2/0] [10/0/0]

HY 7.1 (1.9) 6.8 (1.3) 5.8 (2.1)

[8/2/0] [10/0/0] [10/0/0]

IP 7.4 (1.6) 7.0 (1.4) 6.1 (1.9)

[10/0/0] [10/0/0] [10/0/0]

FT 6.5 (1.3) 6.0 (2.1) 4.7 (1.4)

[10/0/0] [10/0/0] [10/0/0]

TC 6.1 (2.3) 5.8 (2.0) 4.3 (1.6)

[10/0/0] [10/0/0] [10/0/0]

N = 10, values in parenthesis indicate standard deviations. Failure mode is given as [adhesive failure/cohesive failure in resin/cohesive failure
in dentine]. Values connected by horizontal lines showed no significant differences (P > 0.05).
136 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138

bond strength of the self-adhesive cements was significantly free energy.21 The surface free energy of a solid (gS) is defined as
lower in specimens with temporary cement contamination the sum of the dispersion, hydrogen-bonding and polar forces.
(4.3–7.4 MPa) than in control specimens (8.2–7.4 MPa). The dispersion force (g dS ) represents the London interactions
p
SEM observation of the dentine surfaces revealed remnants between apolar molecules. The polar (non-dispersion) force (g S )
of the temporary cements (Fig. 1). The amount of contamina- represents the electric and metallic interactions, in addition to
tion observed differed amongst the temporary cements tested: the dipolar interactions. The hydrogen-bonding force (g hS ),
TH was present across the entire dentine surfaces, IP was which relates to the water and hydroxyl components, was also
present only on parts of the surfaces, and TP and FT were calculated in the current study. Since the hydration of the
largely absent, with the smear layer and smear plug visible. adherend surface is central to the wetting behaviour in relation
to dentine bonding, the polar interactions, including the dipole-
bonding and hydrogen-bonding characteristics, should be
4. Discussion accurately estimated for the interaction with water.
The current study revealed significant decreases in the gS
The etching effect of self-adhesive cements is related to the value for all of the temporary cement-contaminated dentine
acidic functional monomers; these interact with the mineral surfaces tested, which were due to substantial decreases of
components of the tooth substrate, creating a bond via dentine the g hS value. The application of temporary cements has been
demineralisation. The self-adhesive cements are heavily filled reported as a potentially confounding variable that could
and highly viscous compared with the bonding agents, which adversely affect the bond strengths of resin luting cements.
limits their ability to infiltrate the demineralised dentine. Some previous studies reported that the use of temporary
Optimal wettability is important to enable self-adhesive cements, particularly those containing eugenol, negatively
cements to spread across the entire adherend surface and affected the bond strength between resin cements and
to establish adhesion. The strength of the bond between the dentine.22,23 However, other studies failed to observe a
dentine and the self-adhesive cement depends on several reduction in dentine bond strength.24 The current study
factors, including the characteristics and wettability of the demonstrated that the application of both eugenol-containing
adherend surface.12 The wetting of the adherend surface by and eugenol-free temporary cements reduced the gS value.
self-adhesive cements can be evaluated using the contact One reason for this finding was the difficulty of completely
angle.16 On the other hand, one must consider that the removing the temporary cements from the dentine surfaces.
polymerised surface of the self-adhesive cements on which Residues of temporary materials might change the wettability
the surface energy characteristics were determined may be of the dentine surface, leading to changes in the gS value.
different from the polymer that forms the interface between Various approaches have been tried for removing temporary
adherend and polymerised self-adhesive cements. materials from tooth surfaces, including dentine conditioners,
In the past several decades, numerous techniques have air-borne particle abrasion, excavators and ultrasonic sca-
been used to measure the contact angle which were inspired lers.25 The present study employed a routine clinical proce-
by the idea of using Young’s equation.14 The derivation of dure using an ultrasonic scaler to remove the temporary
Young’s equation assumes that the solid surface is smooth, cement mechanically from the dentine surface. SEM observa-
homogeneous and rigid; it should also be chemically and tion of the dentine surfaces demonstrated that the procedure
physically inert with respect to the liquids to be employed. was unable to remove all traces of the temporary cements,
Ideally, according to Young’s equation, a unique contact angle especially TH and IP (Fig. 1). The residues of TH and IP were
is expected for a given system. In a real system, however, a much thicker than those of TP and FT, and the latter showed
range of contact angles is usually obtained instead. The upper significantly lower gS values. Components such as glycerine
limit of the range is the advancing contact angle, which is the and vegetable oil might have been responsible for the
contact angle found at the advancing edge of a liquid drop. The decreased g hS values, reflected in the lower gS values, observed
lower limit is the receding contact angle, which is the contact for TP and FT (Table 1).
angle found at the receding edge. The difference between the The reliability and validity of tensile and shear bond
advancing and receding contact angles is known as the strength determinations of dentine-bonded interface have
contact angle hysteresis. Practically, all solid surfaces exhibit been questioned. Much of the research related to dentine
contact angle hysteresis and because of this hysteresis, the bonding has been done in an attempt to assess the integrity
contact angle interpretation in terms of Young’s equation is and strength of the interfacial bond. Experimental approaches
contentious.17 Accordingly, it should be taken into account for measurement of adhesive bond strengths in dentistry have
that not all the experimentally measured or observed contact consisted primarily of tensile or shear bond strength deter-
angles are reliable and appropriate. minations performed within a defined area in vitro. Although
Measurements of the contact angle on adherent surfaces the testing procedures used are apparently similar, the results
provide information about the surface free energy that relate to presented in different studies may differ tremendously, as
the bonding characteristics of the solids.18–20 According to Hata discussed in detail later. Although it is well known that the
et al.,14 the Fowkes equation for interfacial free energy can be coefficient of variation associated with such bond strength
extended to an interface that includes intermolecular interac- figures is rather high and commonly greater than 30%, the
tions of polar and hydrogen bonding, as well as dispersion wide differences are slightly, but statistically significant.
bonding. Contact angle data for three types of liquid, purely However, large variations in bond strength determinations
nonpolar (1-bromonaphthalene), polar (diiodomethane) and and the lack of standardised laboratory test procedures have
hydrogen bonded (water), were used in calculating the surface contributed to ambiguities in data interpretation.26
 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138 137

The current in vitro study investigated the influence of regarding the ability of these high-viscosity materials to etch
temporary cements on the dentine bonding of self-adhesive through clinically relevant smear layers into the underlying
cements. The bond strength of the self-adhesive cements was dentine.31 The relatively weak bonding potential and the high
significantly lower in specimens with temporary cement viscosity of the mixed cements were expected to have a
contamination (4.3–7.4 MPa) than in control specimens (8.2– negative influence on the chemical reactions, resulting in
7.4 MPa). The predominant mode was adhesive failure for all relatively low bond strengths for the self-adhesive cements
of the specimens tested. The results showed that temporary used in the current study.
cement contamination resulted in significant decreases of the From the results of the present study, decreases in the gS
g hS value, leading to significant decreases of the gS value. A value due to the substantial decrease of the g hS value for the
previous report found no correlation between bond strength temporary cement-contaminated dentine were observed.
and the calculated thermodynamic work of adhesion. This Bond strengths of the self-adhesive cements to temporary
might have been due to the fact that the work of adhesion is a cement-contaminated dentine were lower than those of the
measure of energy, whereas the bond strength is a measure of control. Further research is needed to determine whether
stress. However, the relationship between surface free energy these findings are consistent with clinical performance.
and bond strength allows for other explanations.19
After the application of self-adhesive cements to dentine
surfaces, etching involving resin infiltration can occur along Acknowledgements
with removal of the smear layer. According to the adhesion–
decalcification concept,27 the functional group ionically This work was supported, in part, by Grants-in-Aid for
interacts with calcium in hydroxyapatite. Depending on the Scientific Research (C) 23592808 and 23592810 from the Japan
stability of the resulting calcium–monomer complex in the Society for the Promotion of Science. This project was also
adhesive suspension, chemical bonding might lead to either supported, in part, by the Sato Fund and by a grant from the
decomposition or demineralisation of the tooth surface, and Dental Research Centre of Nihon University School of
chemical bonding with calcium ions could form a functional Dentistry, Japan.
monomer–calcium salt-layered structure on the hydroxyapa-
tite surface.28 In general, temporary cements are applied over
references
the entire smear layer and their ingredients leach into the
dentinal tubules, contaminating the dentine surface. Tempo-
rary cement remnants might act as a barrier that inhibits the
1. Hikita K, Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Ikeda T, Van Landuyt
interactions between acidic functional monomers and inor- K, Maida T, et al. Bonding effectiveness of adhesive luting
ganic components of dentine. agents to enamel and dentin. Dental Materials 2007;23:71–80.
Despite the significant decrease in the gS value, the dentine 2. Lynch CD, Frazier KB, McConnell RJ, Blum IR, Wilson NHF.
bond strength for GC contaminated by HY or IP did not State-of-the-art techniques in Operative Dentistry:
significantly differ from that of the control. GC contains 4- contemporary teaching of posterior composites in UK and
Irish dental schools. British Dental Journal 2010;209:
MET and phosphoric ester functional monomers, which
129–36.
ionically interact with enamel and dentine.29 It also contains
3. Radovic I, Monticelli F, Goracci C, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M.
water, fluoro-alumino-silicate glass and acidic monomers (Table Self-adhesive resin cements: a literature review. Journal of
2). A setting reaction similar to that of glass-ionomer cements Adhesive Dentistry 2008;10:251–8.
might therefore occur. Water in the cement composition is 4. Ferracane JL, Stansbury JW, Burke FJ. Self-adhesive resin
expected to aid the conditioning reaction, increasing the g hS value cements—chemistry, properties and clinical considerations.
of the dentine surfaces. This might lead to dentine bond strength Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 2011;38:295–314.
5. Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M.
for HY and IP contaminated dentine surface convertible as bond
Limited decalcification/diffusion of self-adhesive cements
strength for the control. Amongst the set cements, the gS value of into dentin. Journal of Dental Research 2008;87:974–9.
GC was relatively high, as was the g hS value, which reflected the 6. Cantoro A, Goracci C, Carvalho CA, Coniglio I, Ferrari M.
increasing surface density of the water-interactive Lewis (polar) Bonding potential of self-adhesive luting agents used at
sites on the dentine surfaces. The surface energy parameters different temperatures to lute composite onlays. Journal of
were measured for set self-adhesive cements, whereas the unset Dentistry 2009;37:454–61.
7. Brunzel S, Yang B, Wolfart S, Kern M. Tensile bond strength
material was applied to the dentine surface. Although the
of a so-called self-adhesive luting resin cement to dentin.
differences in the surface energy parameters of set and unset
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 2010;12:143–50.
cements are not known, the components of the set cements 8. Kanakuri K, Kawamoto Y, Matsumura H. Influence of
were assumed to have similar surface energy characteristics to temporary cement remnant and surface cleaning method
the unset cements from which they were formed.12 on bond strength to dentin of a composite luting system.
Theoretically, the phosphoric-acid esters of self-adhesive Journal of Oral Science 2005;47:9–13.
cements behave similarly, and need water to become ionised, 9. Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. The effect of tooth-preparation
cleansing protocol on the bond strength of self-adhesive
and to acid-etch and interact with dentine.30 Water was not
resin cement to dentin contaminated with a hemostatic
listed as a main component of SA or GL, and might have
agent. Operative Dentistry 2011;36:18–26.
mainly derived from the interactions of phosphoric-acid 10. Ribeiro JC, Coelho PG, Janal MN, Silva NR, Monteiro AJ,
groups and alkaline glass particles or tooth apatite. Intrinsic Fernandes CA. The influence of temporary cements on
dentinal wetness might have optimised these acid–base dental adhesive systems for luting cementation. Journal of
reactions allowing better setting. However, concerns remain Dentistry 2011;39:255–62.
138 journal of dentistry 40 (2012) 131–138

11. Rosales-Leal JI, Osorio R, Toledano M, Cabrerizo-Vı́lchez MA, 22. Silva JPL, Queiroz DM, Azevedo LH, Leal LC, Rodrigues JL,
Millstein PL. Influence of eugenol contamination on the Lima AF, et al. Effect of eugenol exposure time and
wetting of ground and etched dentin. Operative Dentistry post-removal delay on the bond strength of a
2003;28:695–9. self-etching adhesive to dentin. Operative Dentistry
12. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A. Bonding of resin 2011;36:66–71.
cements to post materials: influence of surface energy 23. Carvalho CN, de Oliveira Bauer JR, Loguercio AD, Reis A.
characteristics. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 2005;7:231–4. Effect of ZOE temporary restoration on resin-dentin bond
13. Comyn J. Contact angles and adhesive bonding. International strength using different adhesive strategies. Journal of
Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 1992;12:145–9. Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 2007;19:144–52.
14. Hata T, Kitazaki Y, Saito T. Estimation of the surface energy 24. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Influence of eugenol-containing
of polymer solids. Journal of Adhesion 1987;21:177–94. temporary cement on bonding of self-etching adhesives to
15. Aguilar-Mendoza JA, Rosales-Leal JI, Rodrı́guez-Valverde dentin. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry 2006;8:31–4.
MA, González-López S, Cabrerizo-Vı́lchez MA. Wettability 25. Yap AU, Shah KC, Loh ET, Sim SS, Tan CC. Influence of ZOE
and bonding of self-etching dental adhesives. Influence of temporary restorations on microleakage in composite
the smear layer. Dental Materials 2008;24:994–1000. restorations. Operative Dentistry 2002;27:142–6.
16. Wege HA, Aguilar JA, Rodrı́guez-Valverde MÁ. Toledano M, 26. Scherrer SS, Cesar PF, Swain MV. Direct comparison of the
Osorio R, Cabrerizo-Vı́lchez M.Á.. Dynamic contact angle bond strength results of the different test methods: a critical
and spreading rate measurements for the characterization literature review. Dental Materials 2010;26:e78–93.
of the effect of dentin surface treatments. Journal of Colloid 27. Yoshioka M, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G,
and Interface Science 2003;263:162–9. Nomura Y, et al. Adhesion/decalcification mechanisms of
17. Chibowski E. On some relations between advancing, acid interactions with human hard tissues. Journal of
receding and Young’s contact angles. Advances in Colloid and Biomedical Materials Research 2002;59:56–62.
Interface Science 2007;133:51–9. 28. Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Hayakawa S, Nagaoka N, Torii Y,
18. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites: strength of the Osaka A, et al. Self-etch monomer-calcium salt deposition
bond to dentin versus surface energy parameters. Dental on dentin. Journal of Dental Research 2011;90:602–6.
Materials 2005;21:1039–43. 29. Nagakane K, Yoshida Y, Hirata I, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y,
19. Bortolotto T, Ferrari M, Krejci I. Wetting ability of single- Shirai K, et al. Analysis of chemical interaction of 4-MET
component self-etching adhesives on enamel and dentin. with hydroxyapatite using XPS. Dental Materials Journal
American Journal of Dentistry 2008;21:59–63. 2006;25:645–9.
20. Tsujimoto A, Iwasa M, Shimamura Y, Murayama R, 30. Moszner N, Salz U, Zimmermann J. Chemical aspects of self-
Takamizawa T, Miyazaki M. Enamel bonding of single-step etching enamel-dentin adhesives: a systematic review.
self-etch adhesives: influence of surface energy Dental Materials 2005;21:895–910.
characteristics. Journal of Dentistry 2010;38:123–30. 31. Gerth HU, Dammaschke T, Züchner H, Schäfer E. Chemical
21. Combe EC, Owen BA, Hodges JS. A protocol for determining analysis and bonding reaction of RelyX Unicem and Bifix
the surface free energy of dental materials. Dental Materials composites—a comparative study. Dental Materials
2004;20:262–8. 2006;22:934–41.