Evaluation of the effect of desensitizing agents on the retention of complete cast crowns: An in vitro study

Purpose: Dentin desensitizing agents are commonly used in dental practice. But their effect on crown retention have been anecdotal. This study compared and evaluated the effect of two desensitizing agents on the retention of cast crowns cemented with three commonly used luting cements. Materials and...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Arun Prakash Chandrasekaran (Author), Nargunan Deepan (Author), Bharath Karikurve Rao (Author), Swathi Pai (Author), Abhay Sonthalia (Author), Swapna Venkatesh Bettanpalya (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_cbf7736c274e41bb9904b18aafdda06a
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Arun Prakash Chandrasekaran  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Nargunan Deepan  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Bharath Karikurve Rao  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Swathi Pai  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Abhay Sonthalia  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Swapna Venkatesh Bettanpalya  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Evaluation of the effect of desensitizing agents on the retention of complete cast crowns: An in vitro study 
260 |b Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications,   |c 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 2772-5243 
500 |a 2772-5251 
500 |a 10.4103/0976-433X.138730 
520 |a Purpose: Dentin desensitizing agents are commonly used in dental practice. But their effect on crown retention have been anecdotal. This study compared and evaluated the effect of two desensitizing agents on the retention of cast crowns cemented with three commonly used luting cements. Materials and Methods: Recently extracted 81 maxillary first premolars were prepared with flat occlusal surface, 6-degree taper and 4-mm axial height using a custom made paralleling milling device. The prepared teeth were divided into three major groups and further sub-divided into three groups each. GC Tooth Mousse and Seal and Protect were two desensitizing agents. Zinc Phosphate cement, Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement were the three cements used. Impressions of the prepared teeth were made and casted with a loop using base metal alloy. The desensitizers were applied on the tooth except the control group, castings were cemented, thermo-cycled and removed along the path of insertion using a universal testing machine. The results were analyzed using Kruskal - Wallis test and Mann - Whitney U test. Results: Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement exhibited highest retentive strength of all tested group and Zinc phosphate cement being the least. Retentive strength for Resin modified Glass Ionomer Cement was, Control>with Tooth Mousse> with Seal and protect. For Glass Ionomer Cement, Control > with Tooth Mousse > with Seal and Protect. The lowest of retentive strength was for Zinc phosphate which were Control > with Seal and Protect > with Tooth Mousse. Conclusion: The use of Tooth Mousse desensitizer significantly reduced the retention of Zinc Phosphate. Both tooth mouse and Seal and protect did not affect the retentive property of Glass Ionomer cement and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement significantly, hence can be advocated to use prior to crown cementation. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a desensitizing agents 
690 |a dentin hypersensitivity 
690 |a luting cements 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n SRM Journal of Research in Dental Sciences, Vol 5, Iss 3, Pp 174-179 (2014) 
787 0 |n http://www.srmjrds.in/article.asp?issn=0976-433X;year=2014;volume=5;issue=3;spage=174;epage=179;aulast=Chandrasekaran 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2772-5243 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2772-5251 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/cbf7736c274e41bb9904b18aafdda06a  |z Connect to this object online.