Statement of the problem: The bond strength of
PMMA to adhesive and non adhesive cements vary
and there is limited evidence on the bond strength
of cements to PMMA temporary crown and bridges.
Purpose: The purpose of this invitro study was to evaluate the bond strength of PMMA crowns to three temporary luting cements.
Materials and Methods: A total of 30 recently extracted caries free mandibular second premolars were selected and divided into three groups according to luting cements used[Group 1: Zinc Polycarboxylate cement (Polycem, Medicept); Group 2 : Zinc Oxide Eugenol free luting cement (Templute, Prime); Group 3 :Zinc Phosphate cement (Adhesor, Spofa Dental)]. The tooth were mounted on the clear acrylic rectangular blocks of size 8 mm x 8 mm x 20 mm dimensions according to ISO 16506:201. Tooth preparations done and provisional crowns were fabricated using heat cure acrylic PMMA (DPI heat cure tooth moulding powder). Then, these crowns were luted with three temporary luting cements and the bond strength were analysed using universal testing machine (INSTRON 3345). Statistical analysis were done using SPSS 26.0 and compared using one way ANOVA and Tukeys post Hoc test.
Results: The bond strength values of provisional PMMA crown to three different temporary luting cements were 6.37 MPa, 3.39 MPa and 4.40 MPa (Zinc Polycarboxylate cement, Zinc Oxide Eugenol free luting cement, Zinc Phosphate cement). One way ANOVA shows significant difference in the values among the groups (p<0.05) which shows that zinc polycarboxylate provides better bond strength compared with that of the zinc phosphate and zinc oxide eugenol free luting cement to PMMA temporary crowns. Tukeys Post Hoc test for comparison between these groups shows no significant difference in their values (p .00) which shows high significant between the groups (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, Zinc Polycarboxylate provides better bond strength followed by Zinc Phosphate and Non eugenol luting cement to PMMA temporary crowns.
Clinical Implication: Zinc polycarboxylate is the material of choice for luting long term provisional PMMA crown
Key words: Zinc poly carboxylate, Zinc oxide eugenol free, Zinc phosphate, PMMA, Provisional restoration, Provisional luting cements
The key to the success of a provisional restorative
material depends on its ability to fulfill biological,
mechanical, and esthetic requirements until the
permanent restoration is luted1,2. PMMA is long
recognized as a reliable provisional restorative
material for FPD3,4. Use of long term provisional
acrylic FPDs are indicated in selected situations,
ranging from weeks to months as per the case
demands. Provisional restoration should serve
as a template for the final restorations and
should provide preview of the future prosthesis
by enhancing health of abutment and also
Choosing an appropriate temporary cement also depends on the following factors: how long the temporary is needed, which type of tooth to which the provisional is being cemented. The temporary cement chosen must be easily removed and must leave the tooth surface completely cleaned for proper functioning of permanent restoration once placed. Even microscopic remnants of temporary cements interfere with bond of permanent restoration.
Temporary cements with higher compressive strength will withstand occlusal pressures, but will make the temporary restoration harder to remove. Here the bond strength of the luting agent becomes more pertinent than in short term situations. Zinc phosphate, polycarboxylate and zinc oxide eugenol free were used in this study, because these are the commonly used provisional luting cements for cementation of provisional crowns in routine clinical practice.
The bonding nature of PMMA to adhesive and non adhesive cements can vary 5 and there is limited evidence on the bond strength of cements to PMMA temporary crown and bridges. Hence, the study aims to evaluate the bond strength of PMMA to three temporary luting cements. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between bond strength of three temporary luting cements to PMMA resin.
A total of 30 recently extracted caries free
mandibular second premolars of approximately
same dimensions were selected. They were
cleansed by placing teeth in 1% hydrogen peroxide
solution for 24 hours. They were collected from
department of oral surgery. Then the roots of teeth
were incorporated in clear acrylic resin blocks
measuring 8 mm x 8 mm x 20 mm dimensions
according to ISO 16506:201(rectangular block).
The teeth were embedded in the acrylic block at a
level of 2 mm below the cemento-enamel junction.
After this, the mounted teeth were prepared following the principles of tooth preparation, with dental rotary instrument hand piece with diamond bur (TR 12 ISO 199/016). All the dimensions were predetermined to achieve the standardization of the preparation. Flat occlusal reduction, 6° convergences axially, chamfer finish line, height of the crown 5 mm, buccolingual width 5 mm, and mesiodistal width 4 mm6. These were analyzed with digital parallelometer.
After tooth preparation, the aluminium foil was used as a die spacer to obtain the film thickness of the luting cement (25 µm). Then the wax patterns were prepared over the aluminium foil of dimension 8 mm x 8 mm x 20 mm (rectangular block). The patterns were then invested using a dental plaster within the flask, dewaxed and packed with heat cure PMMA (DPI heat cure tooth moulding powder) and the provisional crowns were fabricated.
The provisional crowns were divided into three groups based on temporary luting cements as follows:
Group 1: PMMA resin crowns luted with zinc polycarboxylate cement (Polycem, Medicept)
Group 2: PMMA resin crowns luted with zinc oxide eugenol free luting cement (Templute, Prime)
Group 3: PMMA resin crowns luted with zinc phosphate cement( Adhesor, Spofa dental).
Each group had 10 cemented provisional crowns, therefore, making 30 cemented provisional crowns. The cementation was done by single operator using finger pressure. After cementation, it was allowed to set for 24 hours at room temperature for complete setting.
The tensile bond strength of three respective groups were tested using universal testing machine with cross head speed of 1 mm/min until debonding within 500 N force (INSTRON 3345)6 and the datas were collected.
The datas obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS 26.0 and analyzed using one way ANOVA for comparison of bond strength with three different temporary luting cements and Tukeys post hoc test for comparison between these groups at the significance level of (p<0.05)
The bond strength values of provisional PMMA
crown to three different temporary luting cements
were 6.37 MPa (zinc polycarboxylate), 3.39 MPa (zinc
oxide eugenol free) and 4.40 MPa (zinc phosphate)
respectively. One way ANOVA shows significant
difference in the values among the groups (p<0.05)
which shows that zinc polycarboxylate provides
better bond strength compared with that of the zinc phosphate and zinc oxide eugenol free luting
cement to PMMA temporary crowns. Tukeys Post
Hoc test for comparison between these groups
shows no significant difference in their values (p
= .00) which shows high significant between the
There is significant difference in the bond strength
of three luting cements to heat cure PMMA crowns,
hence null hypothesis is rejected.
This in vitro study is done in the natural teeth to partly simulate the oral environment. There have been many studies in the literature7,8 shows the bond strength of luting cements to different core materials, which is different from present study that compared the luting cements to provisional PMMA crown. These studies also does not simulate the oral environment. There are no studies regarding comparison of the bond strength of different temporary cements to provisional PMMA crowns.
In the present study, zinc polycarboxylate provides better bond strength compared with that of the zinc phosphate and non eugenol luting cement to PMMA temporary crowns. This result is similar to Reddy et al9 and they reasoned that the polycarboxylates have a higher adhesive strength than zinc phosphate due to chemical reactions where zinc ions cross link with adjacent poly acrylic acid molecule. The poly acrylic acid molecules have the ability to chelate to calcium ions in tooth enamel as well as to stainless steel crown which supports our study with increased bond strength of zinc polycarboxylate to provisional PMMA crowns. It also shows that adhesive cements provide better bond strength due to its chemical adhesion to tooth structure compared with non adhesive cements.
In the present study, zinc oxide eugenol free is chosen in comparison with zinc oxide eugenol. The reason is during resin polymerization can be inhibited by any material that reacts with free radicals. Eugenol is a free radical scavenger, inhibiting polymerization either by a decrease in the rate of initiation or an increase in the rate of termination, which leads to increased surface roughness, reduced micro hardness, and color stability of resin composites cured in contact with ZOE cement. Nasreen et al,10 in their study reported that eugenol causes release of calcium from dentin due to its complexing properties. This may have a softening effect on dentin. Inadequate polymerization coupled with softening of dentin leads to decreased bond strength and increased microleakage, resulting in clinical complications, such as fractured restoration, hypersensitivity, secondary caries, and surface discoloration.
Within the limitations of this study, it is concluded that
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.