Calcium silicate cement interface with restorative materials through layering after different time intervals.
The aim was to evaluate the interfacial characteristics of Biodentine, CEM Cement, and ProRoot MTA when restored with different final restorative materials after different time intervals. Biodentine, CEM Cement and ProRoot MTA were layered with amalgam, composite resin or light cure glass ionomer cement. Layering was done either immediately, 24 or 72 h after cement placement. The interface of cements with restorative materials was characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) after separation. Vickers surface microhardness test was also performed on the interface. Statistical analysis included two-way Anova, Dunnett T3, and Tukey HSD. The significance level was set at P < 0.05. The highest microhardness values were seen when restorative materials were layered after 24 h in the case of Biodentine, and after 72 h in the case of CEM Cement and ProRoot MTA. In ProRoot MTA no significant difference was seen in the microhardness when layered with different restorative materials regardless of the time of layering. In immediate layering, Biodentine exhibited the highest microhardness values. Both immediate and delayed layering resulted in element transfer between calcium silicate cements (CSCs) and restorative materials. Deposition and depletion of element occurs subsequent to layering of restorative materials on CSCs. When immediate layering is necessary, Biodentine may be a better option compared to other CSCs evaluated.
['Bolhari|Behnam|B|', 'Ashofteh Yazdi|Kazem|K|', 'Abbasi|Mehdi|M|', 'Sanjari|Sasan|S|', 'Meraji|Naghmeh|N|', 'Özcan|Mutlu|M|']
D002118:Calcium D017610:Calcium Compounds D004338:Drug Combinations D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements D008422:Materials Testing D012823:Silicate Cement D017640:Silicates
Calcium silicate Interface Amalgam Composite resin Glass ionomer cement