Background: Dentin hypersensitivity is common problem between procedure of vital tooth preparation and cementation procedure of final prosthesis. So, use of desensitizing agents may be helpful to minimize the errors.
Aim: To Compare retention of cast crown luted with glass ionomer cement in presence of two different types of desensitizer agent on extracted teeth.
Material: Desensitizing agents used are bioactive Glass and GLUMA, Glass Ionomer Cement has been used as luting agent. Other required items are crown cutting bur, airotor handpiece, spatula, glass Cement carrier, microtip brush, universal testing machine.
Methodology: In this study total number of 60 premolars with good coronal anatomy, which are extracted for orthodontic purposes, were collected from Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Institute of dental Sciences. Then they were mounted individually in die stone block. Tooth preparation for the metal prosthesis of maxillary and mandibular premolars was carried out following the standard principles of tooth preparation use milling surveyor and they are grouped randomly into Group A- Luting cement (Control group), group B- Luting cement + Kulzer Gluma Desensitizer, group C- Luting cement + Bioactive glass. After fabrication of metal coping, tooth conditioning has been carried out then cementation was done using GIC. Retention of coping was checked using universal testing machine.
Result: A comparison was made for the mean stress value within three groups. GIC + Bioactive had the highest mean stress (6.52 ± 1.81) followed by Control group (3.88 ± 2.37). GIC ± Gluma had the least mean stress of 2.59 ± 1.19.
Conclusion: Bioactive glass + GIC exhibited higher retentive value as compared to prosthesis luted only with GIC and GIC + Gluma. So clinically it can be inferred that for vital tooth preparation bioactive glass can be used as desensitizing agent for the intermediate period till the permanent crown is luted.
© 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd.