The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 10 , ISSUE 3 ( May, 2009 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

A Comparison of Two Methods of Removing Zinc Oxide-eugenol Provisional Cement Residue from the Internal Surfaces of Cast Restorations

Ramin Mosharraf, Bahram Soleimani, Mehdi Sanaee-Nasab

Citation Information : Mosharraf R, Soleimani B, Sanaee-Nasab M. A Comparison of Two Methods of Removing Zinc Oxide-eugenol Provisional Cement Residue from the Internal Surfaces of Cast Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009; 10 (3):27-34.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-10-3-27

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-05-2009

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2009; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

Remnants of provisional cement on the internal surface of cast restorations can have an adverse effect on the performance of the definitive luting agent. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of eugenolcontaining temporary cement removal by an ultrasonic or an organic solvent on the retentive strength of metallic rings cemented to amalgam cores using zinc phosphate cement.

Methods and Materials

A total of 36 cylindrical amalgam cores measuring 5.9×6 mm were made by condensing amalgam in brass molds for use in this in vitro study. Thirty-six cylindrical spaces measuring 6×6 mm were machined in the center of cast rods of Rexillium III alloy to create simulated retainers. The amalgam cores were divided into two groups and provisionally cemented in these cylindrical spaces (retainers) using zinc oxide–eugenol cement. After separation of the cores from the retainers, one group was cleaned with an ultrasonic cleaning device with water and the other group was cleaned with Solitine organic solvent. All specimens were then cemented with zinc phosphate cement and the samples were stored at 100% humidity in a 37°C water bath after which they were tested with a DARTEK testing machine at a 0.02 cm/minute cross head speed. The data were analyzed using the Independent t-test.

Results

The statistical analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (p<0.0005) with the ultrasonic group having significantly higher separation forces than the Solitine group.

Conclusion

Specimens treated with the ultrasonic cleaner showed a higher mean separation force (282.2 MPa) than the solvent group (439.5 MPa).

Clinical Significance

Despite the convenience of using an organic solvent for cleaning the internal surface of cast restorations, the ultrasonic cleaning method is more effective for removing zinc-oxide temporary cement.

Citation

Mosharraf R, Soleimani B, Sanaee-Nasab M. A Comparison of Two Methods of Removing Zinc Oxide-eugenol Provisional Cement Residue from the Internal Surfaces of Cast Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009 May; (10)3:027-034.


PDF Share
  1. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001. p. 765, 771.
  2. A simple method for cleaning zinc oxide–eugenol provisional cement residues from the internal surface of casting restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91:200.
  3. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Carol Stream: Quintessence; 1997. p. 406.
  4. The effect of zinc oxide-eugenol on the shear bond strength of a commonly used bonding system. Endod Dent Traumatol 2000; 16:265-8.
  5. Effect of ZOE temporary restoration on Resin-Dentin Bond Strength Using Different Adhesive Strategies. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19:144–53.
  6. Effect of temporary cements on the bond strength of ceramic luted to dentin. Dent Mater 2005; 21:794-803.
  7. Surface roughness of dentin after tooth preparation with different rotary instrumentation. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75:122-8.
  8. In vivo evaluation of three cleansing techniques for prepared abutment teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88:437-41.
  9. Effects of cement on crown retention. J Prosthet Dent 1982; 48:289-91.
  10. Effect of the dentin cleansing techniques on dentin wetting and on the bond strength of a resin luting agent. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 94:363-9.
  11. Effect of zinc oxide-eugenol on shear bond strengths of selected core/cement combinations. J Prosthet Dent 1986; 55:206-8.
  12. A comparison of two methods for removing zinc oxide-eugenol provisional cement. Int J Prosthodont 1992; 5:78-84.
  13. Temporary cement remnants as an adhesion inhibiting factor in the interface between resin cements and bovine dentin. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:440–52.
  14. Characterization of enamel and dentin surfaces after removal of temporary cement—study on removal of temporary cement. Dent Mater 1993;12:18–28.
  15. A technique to recement provisional crowns by reactivating residual zinc oxide– eugenol cement. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95:397-8.
  16. Influence of eugenol-containing temporary cement on efficacy of dentin bonding systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1999; 107:65-9.
  17. Effect of internal micro blasting on retention of cemented cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64:557-62.
  18. Effect of aging on temporary cement retention in vitro. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65:768-71.
  19. Effects of temporary cementation on permanent cement retention to composite resin cores. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 67:856-9.
  20. Influence of provisional cements on ultimate bond strength of indirect composite restorations to dentin. J Adhes Dent 2005; 7:225-30.
  21. Interim luting agents, composite core surface hardness and retention of interim and final restorations. Am J Dent 1990; 3:207-12.
  22. google.com/search?q=cache:xexMwPuGlwYJ:www.kerrdental.com/msds/kerrlab/us/english/Solitine.pdf+solitine&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.