Joel M. Eichen D.D.S. <joeleichen[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -


Go to

Linkname: NLM Gateway Search
URL: http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/gw/Cmd

and enter cement base amalgam in the search field. It gives about 50 refs,
and I have started to look at the most recent abstracts. Interesting about
the excellent mechanical properties of zinc phosphate which you said gives
out too much heat, presumably at the time of placement reaction in a tooth
near the pulp.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

1: Br Dent J. 1993 Nov 20;175(10):363-7. Related Articles, Links


Bonded amalgam restorations: a comparative study of glass-ionomer and
resin adhesives.

al-Moayad M, Aboush YE, Elderton RJ.

Department of Conservative Dentistry, University of Bristol Dental
School.

This study assessed the effectiveness of a glass-ionomer liner/base
(Vitrebond) and two adhesive resins (Amalgambond and Panavia Ex) in
bonding amalgam to enamel/dentine cavities in vitro. Restorations
placed without any intermediary, or with varnish, served for
comparison purposes. Standardised unretentive cavities on the buccal
sides of a total of 78 extracted human molar teeth were prepared to
receive the restorations. After application of the adhesive materials
(without light curing the Vitrebond), the cavities were filled with
amalgam (Dispersalloy). Each specimen was stored for 24 hours in
distilled water at 37 degrees C. The amalgam restorations were then
pulled from the cavities using an Instron machine and the retentive
strength values were recorded. The results showed that any of the
three adhesive intermediary agents substantially enhanced the
retention of the amalgam restorations. The Vitrebond specimens had the
highest mean retentive strength value (133 N), followed by Amalgambond
(18% lower) and Panavia Ex (38% lower); the difference between the
value for the Vitrebond specimens and that for the Panavia Ex
specimens was statistically significant. The Vitrebond specimens
failed due to gross enamel fractures and a cohesive failure of the
glass-ionomer layer. The Amalgambond specimens failed at the
resin/amalgam interface, while the Panavia Ex specimens showed enamel
fractures and failure at the resin/dentine interface. It appears that
Vitrebond has the potential for being an effective amalgam adhesive in
vivo.

--
Joel M. Eichen, .
Philadelphia PA

DISCLAIMER FOLLOWS:

*********

Dental health-related material
is provided for information purposes
only and does not necessarily
represent endorsement by or an official
position of the SciMedDentistry gang
or any other official agency either
actual or fictitious or Steve Mancuso.

Advice on the treatment or care
of an individual patient should
be obtained through consultation
with a dentist who has examined
that patient or is familiar with
that patient's dental history.

STANDARD DISCLAIMER