The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2011 ) > List of Articles


Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Calcium-enriched Mixture Cement and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate to Composite Resin

Siavash Savadi Oskoee, Soodabeh Kimyai, Mahmoud Bahari, Paria Motahari, Mohammad Jafar Eghbal, Saeed Asgary

Citation Information : Oskoee SS, Kimyai S, Bahari M, Motahari P, Eghbal MJ, Asgary S. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Calcium-enriched Mixture Cement and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate to Composite Resin. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011; 12 (6):457-462.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1076

Published Online: 01-08-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2011; The Author(s).



Adhesion of composite resin and pulp capping biomaterials remarkably influences treatment outcomes. This in vitro study aimed to compare the shear bond strength of composite resin to calcium enriched mixture (CEM) cement, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI) with or without acid etching.

Materials and methods

A total of 90 cylindrical acrylic blocks containing a central hole, measuring 4 mm diameter and 2 mm height were prepared. The blocks were randomly divided into three experimental groups based on being filled with CEM, MTA or RMGI. Samples in each group were then randomly divided into two subgroups, i.e. with or without phosphoric acid etching. Placing composite resin cylinders on the samples, shear bond strengths were measured using a universal testing machine. Failure modes of the samples were evaluated under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests.


Shear bond strengths in the etched and nonetched samples were not significantly different (p = 0.60). There was a significant difference in shear bond strength values of the three experimental materials (p < 0.001) and RMGI showed the highest strength values (p < 0.001); no significant difference was observed between MTA and CEM (p = 0.51). The interaction of the type of material and surface etching was statistically significant (p < 0.001). All of the samples showed cohesive failure mode.


Acid etching of MTA, CEM and RMGI do not improve the shear bond strength of these materials to composite resin. Besides, shear bond strength values of MTA and CEM to composite resin, are favorable due to their cohesive mode of failure.

Clinical significance

When MTA and CEM biomaterials are used in vital pulp therapy, it is advisable to cover these materials with RMGI. In addition, if it is not possible to use RMGI, the surface etching of MTA and CEM biomaterials is not necessary prior to composite restoration using total-etch adhesive resin.

How to cite this article

Oskoee SS, Kimyai S, Bahari M, Motahari P, Eghbal MJ, Asgary S. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Calcium-enriched Mixture Cement and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate to Composite Resin. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(6):457-462.

PDF Share
  1. Sealing ability of a mineral trioxide aggregate for repair of lateral root perforations. J Endod 1993;19:541-44.
  2. Sealing ability of a mineral trioxide aggregate when used as a root end filling material. J Endod 1993;19:591-95.
  3. Chemical differences between white and gray mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod 2005;31:101-03.
  4. Mineral trioxide aggregate: A comprehensive literature review—Part III: Clinical applications, drawbacks, and mechanism of action. J Endod 2010;36:400-13.
  5. Mineral trioxide aggregate or calcium hydroxide direct pulp capping: An analysis of the clinical treatment outcome. J Endod 2010;36:806-13.
  6. Vital pulp therapy in vital permanent teeth with cariously exposed pulp: A systematic review. J Endod 2011;37:581-87.
  7. MTA pulpotomy of human permanent molars with irreversible pulpitis. Aust Endod J 2009;35:4-8.
  8. Antibacterial effects of five different root canal sealing materials. J Oral Sci 2008;50:469-74.
  9. Sealing ability of a novel endodontic cement as a root-end filling material. J Biomed Mater Res A 2008;87:706-09.
  10. The properties of a new endodontic material. J Endod 2008;34:990-93.
  11. Comparison of mineral trioxide aggregate's composition with Portland cements and a new endodontic cement. J Endod 2009;35:243-50.
  12. Cytotoxicity of calcium enriched mixture cement compared with mineral trioxide aggregate and intermediate restorative material. Aust Endod J. “In press”.
  13. Effect of two storage solutions on surface topography of two root-end fillings. Aust Endod J 2009;35:147-52.
  14. Management of inflammatory external root resorption by using calcium-enriched mixture cement: A case report. J Endod 2011;37:411-43.
  15. Permanent molar pulpotomy with a new endodontic cement: A case series. J Conserv Dent 2009;12: 31-36.
  16. Regenerative endodontic treatment (revascularization) for necrotic immature permanent molars: A review and report of two cases with a new biomaterial. J Endod 2011;37:562-67.
  17. Repair of furcal perforation using a new endodontic cement. Clin Oral Investig 2010;14:653-58.
  18. Furcal perforation repair using calcium enriched mixture cement. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:156-58.
  19. Periradicular regeneration after endodontic surgery with calcium-enriched mixture cement in dogs. J Endod 2010;36:837-41.
  20. A comparative study of histologic response to different pulp capping materials and a novel endodontic cement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:609-14.
  21. Treatment outcomes of pulpotomy in primary molars using two endodontic biomaterials: A 2-year randomized clinical trial. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2011;12:189-93.
  22. Shear bond strength of conventional glass ionomer cements bound to mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod 2009;35:1381-83.
  23. The evaluation of bond strength of a composite and a compomer to white mineral trioxide aggregate with two different bonding systems. J Endod 2008;34:603-05.
  24. Fundamental concepts of enamel and dentin adhesion. In: Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift Jr EJ, editors. Sturdevant's art and science of operative dentistry. USA: Mosby 2006:245.
  25. Shear bond strength of resin modified glass ionomer cement bonded to different tooth-colored restorative materials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007;8:25-34.
  26. A comparison of microtensile bond strengths of several dentin bonding systems to primary and permanent dentin. Dent Mater 2002;18:239-45.
  27. Shear bond strength of chemical and light-cured glass ionomer cements bonded to resin composites. Aust Endod J 1998;43:81-86.
  28. The relative shear bond strength of visible light-curing and chemically curing glass-ionomer cement to composite resin. Quintessence Int 1992;23:641-44.
  29. Effect of acid-etching procedure on selected physical properties of mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J 2009;42:1004-14.
  30. Effect of blood contamination on retention characteristics of MTA when mixed with different liquids. J Endod 2006;32:421-24.
  31. Push-out bond strength of two rootend filling materials in root-end cavities prepared by Er, Cr:YSGG laser or ultrasonic technique. Aust Endod J. ‘In press’.
  32. Factors influencing bond strengths between unetched glass ionomers and resins. Oper Dent 1991;16:90-95.
  33. Bond strength between resin composite and etched and non-etched glass ionomer. Braz Dent J 1997;8: 73-78.
  34. Bond strength of composites to hybrid ionomers. Oper Dent 1996;21:147-52.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.