No Author Selected

This BOND edition covers the pursuit for durable dental aesthetics.

Unique insightful articles from renowned clinicians and researchers of the likes of Prof. Bart Van Meerbeek, Prof. Dr. Florian Beuer and Dr. Hendrik Zellerhoff are waiting for you. 

BOND | VOLUME 6 | 03/20

We post the BOND also here for your convenience; Enjoy!

Previous versions:

BOND | VOLUME 5 | 05/2019

BOND | VOLUME 4 | 06/2018

BOND | VOLUME 3 | 10/2017

BOND | VOLUME 2 | 04/2017

BOND | VOLUME 1 | 12/2016

To achieve excellence it is crucial to know the properties of modern materials and their correct clinical procedure. With this premise, surprising clinical results can also be achieved by combining different materials in the same clinical case.

This clinical case follows the aesthetic request of the patient who wanted to solve the pathology concerning the incisors with a direct composite restoration on 2.1 and a KATANA^TM STML crown on 1.1.

Following the mock-up the patient wanted larger incisor shapes with a strong character. The 2.1 was restored only with the MAJESTY^TM ES-2 Classic A2 mass exploiting the extraordinary ability of mimicry that comes from the Kuraray Noritake Dental light diffusion technology - LDT. The restoration on the 2.5 was performed with a CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic block - KATANA^TM AVENCIA^TM.

KATANA^TM AVENCIA^TM Block was characterized with a staining resin before cementation with the new PANAVIA^TM SA Cement Universal. PANAVIA^TM SA Cement Universal includes in its formulation a new type of silane coupling agent – LCSi monomer and this ensures strong and durable chemical bond to glass ceramics and composite resins without pretreatment with silane.

A strong and durable bond between the tooth and the restoration is a decisive factor influencing the long-term performance of dental restorations. The quality of the bond, however, is not only affected by the bonding agent or cementation solution used, but also by the condition of the bonding surface. For those who would like to ensure clean tooth and restoration surfaces in an easy way, Kuraray Noritake Dental has developed KATANA™ Cleaner, a universal cleaner with MDP salt and a pH of 4.5 for intra- and extra-oral application.

It has been proven that proteins present in saliva and blood have a negative effect on the performance of dental adhesives. Especially in indirect procedures, however, it is impossible to keep the bonding surfaces free of oral fluids. At try-in at the latest, the prepared tooth and the restoration are contaminated and need to be cleaned. Rinsing with water does not have the desired effect, and even with many available cleaners, a certain amount of proteins are usually left on the surface. Tests show that by using KATANA™ Cleaner or by sandblasting, the desired high cleaning effect needed is obtained, without compromising bond strength. This is true for KATANA™ Zirconia restorations, while KATANA™ Cleaner also leads to the desired results on dentin and enamel – surfaces in the oral cavity for which sandblasting and most of the other cleaners are not indicated.

The use of KATANA™ Cleaner offers yet another advantage: the cleaning procedure is extraordinarily simple, quick and neat. The universal cleaner comes in a bottle with an innovative flip-top cap, enabling single-handed dispensing onto the dish. It is then rubbed into the surface of the restoration and the prepared tooth structure or the abutment for ten seconds, rinsed with water and dried. Thanks to the high surface activity of MDP salt, these ten seconds are sufficient to remove the proteins on the substrate almost completely, creating conditions very similar to those found on a non-contaminated bonding surface. Subsequently, the selected bonding agent or cementation solution – e.g. PANAVIA™ V5 or PANAVIA™ SA Cement Universal – is applied according to the maufacturer’s usage instructions.

The result is a strong long-lasting bond, which gives users a peace of mind. Pilot users who have already tested the product agree that KATANA™ Cleaner is the easy way to optimise bond quality and streamline any adhesive procedure.

As co-editor-in-chief of the Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, Prof. Bart Van Meerbeek is one of the most respected authorities on the topic of dental bonding agents. Here, he discusses how they have advanced over the last three decades and what the future of adhesive dentistry might look like.

Prof. Van Meerbeek, how have bonding agents changed and advanced since you first began studying them?

I believe that the great progress dental adhesive technology has undergone in the last 30 years, and the progress in bonding agents in particular, has had a great impact on the field of dentistry and particularly on restorative dentistry, of course. Many of the current restorative dental procedures make use of adhesive materials and techniques and have advanced greatly compared with when I wrote my dissertation more than two decades ago on the topic of adhesion to dentine. Adhesion to enamel is, of course, relatively easy to achieve in comparison with adhesion to dentine, and when I first started researching this topic, I was limited to conducting clinical trials in which we were confronted with a relatively high number of restoration losses in the short term. I was lucky to have been able to witness first-hand the fast advancements dental bonding has made, having conducted research in this field now for nearly 30 years.

At a certain point, the research community started to realise that there is a smear layer in-between, which is created through cavity preparation, and that this layer interferes with bonding. If you want to achieve successful micromechanical and chemical bonding to the substrate, you first need to do something with this smear layer.

After this, we entered the era of conditioners and primers. In the past, the restorative community had been a little bit afraid of using phosphoric acid owing to its potential for pulp irritation. More and more, however, dental professionals began to use etchants with this chemical in them, as well as primers that effectively promoted bonding between the adhesive resin and dentine. While having achieved excellent bonding performance with multistep adhesives in the laboratory, as was later confirmed in clinical studies, further design and development of adhesive materials next focused on simplification and shortening of bonding procedures.

Out of this, two kinds of adhesives, making use essentially of two different bonding modes, arose: the etch-and-rinse adhesives and the self-etch, or etch-and-dry, adhesives. The newest generation of universal adhesives now enables dental practitioners to choose which of the two bonding modes to apply with one single adhesive formulation.

What advantages do bonded restorations offer over more traditional methods?

Bonded restorations are minimally invasive—the dentist doesn’t have to remove non-diseased tissue to create undercuts to keep the restoration in place, allowing for a more conservative approach. Keeping as much enamel as possible should be a goal of any restorative procedure, as it is simply the best tissue to bond to. Although bonding to dentine has always remained more challenging and has actually slowed down our adhesive endeavours for a long time, adhesively restoring teeth, involving also effective bonding to dentine, can today be achieved in a reliable, predictable and durable way.

Along with highly successful implantology to replace missing teeth, lessening the need for bridges, solitary tooth restorations have substantially increased in number. Bonding promoted the additional shift from conventional tissue-invasive crowns to tissue-preserving partial tooth restorations, as modern adhesives can hold such partial restorations in place on rather flat and even non-retentive surfaces. In addition, bonding procedures allow for more natural-appearing restorations to be achieved by techniques to adhesively lute aesthetic restorations made of glass-ceramics and even the strong zirconia ceramics that no longer can be considered non-bondable.

What is your opinion regarding the current generation of universal adhesive solutions?

I think that this generation is very good, but that they are still not always as good as the more traditional gold standard two-step self-etch and three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives when it comes to their intrinsic bonding potential to dental tissue. However, I do see it as a positive that many of these universal adhesives integrate the MDP monomer, which should be considered to be one of the best functional monomers available today, though it needs to be present at a high concentration and purity level.

The MDP monomer is, generally speaking, excellent at bonding to zirconia as well. When it comes to bonding to different kinds of ceramic as well as resin-based composite restorative materials, it is always helpful to know which universal adhesives contain silane and are claimed to no longer need further treatment of the restoration. This has the advantages of lower technique sensitivity and fewer procedural steps—provided that it does, of course, work. There is current scientific evidence that the silane incorporated in today’s acidic aqueous universal adhesives is, however, insufficiently stable. Fortunately, research is underway to develop new universal adhesives that contain other silanes with higher stability in water at higher acidity.

Overall, I believe that a restoration primer that contains a high concentration of silane along with the MDP monomer is still more effective than many universal adhesives for bonding to restorative materials, since these universal adhesives can contain many other ingredients that create a kind of competition within the material to reach and interact with the substrate surface, leading to lesser bonds.

Another shortcoming of universal adhesives is their thin film thickness and relatively high hydrophilicity, promoting water uptake and hence making them sensitive to hydrolytic degradation. In this light, it’s important to note that, when a viscous and hydrophobic flowable composite is applied on top of a universal adhesive, it can make up for this somewhat and allow for durable bonding to take place.

Is the MDP monomer crucial to the ultimate success of universal adhesives? Are there other factors that can influence this?

Well, it’s very clear that the MDP monomer is one of the most effective monomers available, given its primary chemical binding potential to hydroxyapatite. However, there are significant differences in the MDP monomer purity and concentration levels between these products, factors that are affected by whether or not the monomer is synthesised by the company itself or whether this process is outsourced. Essentially, a universal adhesive that contains a high concentration of very pure MDP monomer should perform the best.

Are there any specific advantages that a self-etch adhesive possesses?

The biggest advantage is that it doesn’t remove all hydroxyapatite and minerals present in dentine and so keeps the weaker dentinal collagen protected. Phosphoric-acid etching results in relatively deep and complete demineralisation with collagen exposure, making the bond more prone to degradation. Partially maintaining minerals around collagen using a mild self-etch adhesive additionally allows for strong ionic bond formation to take place when the adhesive in particular contains the functional monomer MDP. In addition, one should be aware that, while chemical binding doesn’t necessarily lead to higher bond strength, it can create better long-term bond durability.

What do you see as the next step in adhesive dentistry?

One possibility is to reduce the number of steps in the adhesion process with the final goal of having self-adhering restorative materials. There have been developments in this direction, including studies and commercial products, though the products haven’t always proved to be very effective and their bond durability is unclear. Now, however, there are newer materials coming to market with claims that they can be used with no pretreatment. Their clinical effectiveness, nevertheless, still needs to be proved and guaranteed before such self-adhering restorative materials could be used as true amalgam alternatives in routine dental practice.

Another possibility, and current R & D hype, is the development of bioactive adhesives. Many dental researchers and many companies want adhesives not only to deliver good bonding performance but also to have certain therapeutic benefits. What exactly a bioactive adhesive is depends on who you’re talking to. Some researchers believe that they should have antibacterial qualities, whereas others state that remineralisation of dentine and pulpal cell interaction are needed to qualify for the term “bioactive”. We certainly need to investigate whether we can give these materials these additional properties, but on one condition: that the adhesive material does not lose any of its original bonding abilities. That, in my opinion, is the biggest challenge for the future of adhesive dentistry.

By Irfan Abas
Dental implantologist & restorative dentist

Irfan Abas is a specialist in the field of oral implantology & restorative dentistry and an international speaker on the subject. He has given more than 20 presentations, workshops and live surgery courses throughout the world. TP - a dutch dental magazine, of which he is also editor, has published multiple articles under his name. Another highlight is a publication in the NTvT, in collaboration with Prof. Gert Meijer (Radboud UMC), under whose supervision Abas successfully completed the four-year postdoctoral training Reconstructive Dentistry in 2014. He is also an instructor and lecturer for the AAIE and chair of MINEC Netherlands. Irfan Abas has his own practice in Bussum, the Netherlands (tandartsabas.nl).

A healthy 42 year-old male patient requested reconstruction of his central incisors, which were badly worn.

Pre-Treatment

After producing the mock-up, grooves were prepared through the mock-up.

To fit two lithium disilicate veneers, a preparation of 1 mm was required. After removing the mock-up, the preparation was perfected.

Checking the space using a silicone mold.

Definitive preparation (frontal)

Temporary veneers made from temporary resin based material (Protemp)

Spot-etching before bonding the temporary veneers in place.

A small amount of flowable composite applied to the etched surfaces.

Light curing the entire surface of the temporary veneers.

Finished temporary veneers.

The veneers constructed by the dental technician.

Checking the fit of the veneers

Rubber dam fitted to enable controlled adhesive cementation.

Etching with 35% phosphoric acid K-Etchant Syringe for 10 seconds.

Treatment with selfetching primer PANAVIA™ V5 Tooth Primer (left on for 20 sec.)

Etching of the lithium disilicate veneers with hydrogen fluoride.

Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus MDP-silane primer applied to the veneers.

Veneers secured to a placement instrument before definitive cementation

PANAVIA V5 Paste applied to the inner surface of the veneer.

PANAVIA V5 Paste spread over the veneer.

Veneer fitted and excess removed.

Light curing (minimum 10 sec.).

Immediately after the adhesive cementation with PANAVIA V5.

Immediately post-op.

Immediately post-op.

Two months post-op.

One year post-op.

One year post-op.

NOW 18 Minutes Sintering using the CEREC SpeedFire

KATANA™ Zirconia Block, the innovative multi-layered zirconia block^*1, can be used with Dentsply Sirona's CEREC system^*2. Now the 18 minutes sintering program^*3 is developed and installed into CEREC SpeedFire. New sintering technology makes it possible to fabricate full zirconia restoration in approx. 35 minutes.

An ideal composite material should satisfy three basic requirements: function, aesthetics and biocompatibility. A member of the CLEARFIL MAJESTY family, Kuraray Noritake Dental’s CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow combines excellent handling, polishability and mechanical strength to provide a solution for all cavity classes. This universal flowable composite employs silane and filler technologies to maximise both its procedural and aesthetic outcomes, allowing dentists to create long-lasting restorations with reduced chairside time.

A new standard for flowable composites

Traditionally, a composite’s flowability has been inversely related to its filler content. When flowable composites were first introduced in the mid-1990s, their lower viscosity was enabled by a filler level much lower than that of conventional composites. This, however, meant that these flowables fared poorly in a clinical setting, demonstrating inferior mechanical properties when compared to traditional hybrid composites.

With CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow, dentists can now use a flowable composite with mechanical properties comparable to those of conventional alternatives. Thanks to Kuraray Noritake Dental’s silane technology, millions of submicron filler particles fit into the composite, reliably adhering to the resin and maintaining long-term stability. CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow possesses a scientifically tested flexural strength of over 150 MPa, similar to that of a universal nano hybrid composite, making it suitable for use in Class I and II restorations.

Aesthetic restorations

However, the small, durable particles of CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow provide more than just mechanical reliability. Special cluster fillers provide a light diffusion effect that is similar to that of natural teeth, meaning that the material blends effortlessly with the existing tooth structure. Unlike other flowables, CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow is glossy immediately after curing. This gloss can be improved with remarkable simplicity—simply wipe the cured resin with an ethanol-moistened gauze or cotton roll to produce a smooth surface that is proven to maintain its gloss over time.

Ideal handling

CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow’s low viscosity monomers ensure that it has excellent handling characteristics, promising better sculpting for the dentist. The flowable composite does not stick to the needle tip or to any instruments, only adhering to the area to which it is applied, while the proprietary design of the syringe itself minimises air bubbles when dispensing. Once dispensed, the paste possesses great consistency with its non-slumping formula, ensuring that it can maintain its shape. A truly universal composite, CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow allows dentists to create highly aesthetic restorations with ease.

Obtain results in four simple steps

Creating aesthetic and durable restorations has never been more achievable. Simply prepare the cavity and apply bonding, dispense and sculpt the CLEARFIL MAJESTY™ ES Flow, light-cure and, finally, polish. It’s as easy as that.

This year marks the 40th year of Kuraray's entry into the commercial dental products market. This edition of the BOND is fully dedicated to celebrating our unique position in modern dentistry.

We post the BOND here for your convenience; Enjoy!

BOND | VOLUME 4 | 06/2018

Previous versions:

BOND | VOLUME 3 | 10/2017

BOND | VOLUME 2 | 04/2017

BOND | VOLUME 1 | 12/2016

There is still some confusion among dental practitioners about how to cement zirconia restorations. In general, all types of cements – adhesive or self-adhesive resin cements and conventional cements – are compatible with all types of zirconia. The actual choice should be based on the restoration design (retentive or non-retentive), the translucency of the zirconia and the clinical situation (feasibility of working field isolation).

When to use which type of cement

The use of adhesive resin cements is mandatory whenever the highest possible bond strength is required. This is the case with one-wing Maryland bridges and other types of restorations lacking micromechanical retention, and with two-piece implant abutments.

In some other situations where retention is not an issue, adhesive or self-adhesive resin cements may have a beneficial effect. The major reason is their more esthetic appearance compared to conventional cements, which offers advantages whenever a highly translucent restorative material is used (e.g. KATANA Zirconia UTML). An important precondition for adhesive luting, however, is a dry working field. Consequently, conventional cements are preferable in the context of placing crowns, bridges and other types of restorations with retentive designs whenever opaque zirconia framework materials are used and / or it is difficult to ensure a dry working field.

How to pre-treat the tooth and the restoration

The highest bond strength of adhesive resin cements to zirconia is obtained after sandblasting with alumina (particle size max. 50 µm, pressure approx. 1 bar). Hence, this procedure is highly recommended. Subsequent steps may be different depending on the cement system employed and should be carried out according to the manufacturer’s instructions for use. On the side of the tooth, enamel etching is important independent of the products used.

Which products to use

In each of the cement classes, there are many different products to choose from. My recommendation is to select a proven and easy-to-use luting material. Among those products achieving the same high bond strength, the solution requiring the fewest application steps seems preferable as it reduces the risk of application errors. At Charité – University Medicine Berlin, we count on PANAVIA cements, which are based on many years of expertise in developing products for adhesive luting of zirconia.