RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™/Maxicap™
RelyX UnicemTechnical Product Profile
TM
2
Table of Contents1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
2. Indications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
3. History of Dental Cements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
4. Chemical Composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
4.1. New Monomers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
4.2. New Fillers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
4.3. New Initiator Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
5. Setting Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
6. Active Transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
6.1. Hydrophilic – Hydrophobic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
6.2. Acidic – Neutral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
7. Mechanical Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
7.1. Linear Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
7.2. Mechanical Properties Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
8. Clinical Application of RelyX™ Unicem Cement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
9. Pretreatment of Restorative Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
10. Official Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
11. Study Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
11.1. Clinical in vivo Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Clinical Performance of Ceramic In- and Onlays after 3 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Clinical Performance of Ceramic In- and Onlays after 1 year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Clinical Performance of Composite, All-ceramic,
and PFM Restorations after 4 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Clinical Performance of Metal, Ceramic, and PFM Restorations after 2 years . . . . . . . .16
Clinical Performance of Endodontic Posts after 3 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Human Pulp Response to Resin Luting Cements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
11.2. In vitro Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Measuring Bond Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Shear Bond Strength of Different Classes of Luting Cements to Human Dentin . . . . . .22
Shear Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel and Lava™ Ceramic
Immediately and After 24 Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
Tensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Shear Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel after 24 hours and
Thermocycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Microtensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26
Tensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
Immediate Shear Bond Strength to Bovine Dentin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
Tensile Bond Strength to Bovine Dentin and Enamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
Retentive Bond Strength of Lava™ Zirconia Crowns on Human Dentin . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
Shear Bond Strength to Zirconia Ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31
Shear Bond Strength to Lava™ Zirconia Ceramic and Glass Ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Shear Bond Strength to Alumina Ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
Retention Strength of Fiber Posts Cemented with two Different Cements . . . . . . . . . . . .34
Shear Bond Strength to Fiber Post . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35
3
Table of ContentsMarginal Sealing in Fiber Post Treated Teeth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
Marginal Adaptation of Ceramic Inlays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
Interfacial Adaptation of Partial Ceramic Crowns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
pH Profile of Various Luting Cements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
Shear Bond Strength to Core Build-Up Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
Shear Bond Strength to CAD/CAM Glass Ceramics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41
Shear Bond Strength to Metal, Composite, and Ceramic Restorative Materials . . . . . . .45
12. RelyX™ Unicem Field Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46
13. Excerpt from the Instructions For Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
14. Technique Guides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
14.1. RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ / Maxicap™ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
14.2. Technique Guide RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50
14.3. Technique Guide RelyX™ Fiber Post / RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51
15. Frequently Asked Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52
16. Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
17. Product Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
4
5
1. IntroductionRelyX™ Unicem cement is a dual-curing, self-adhesive universal resin cement for adhesive
cementation of indirect ceramic, composite or metal restorations. When using RelyX Unicem
cement, bonding and conditioning of the tooth are no longer necessary. The cement is charac-
terized by a higher moisture tolerance, as compared to multi-step composite cements. RelyX
Unicem cement releases fluoride ions and is available in various shades. Among others, its
essential characteristics are high dimensional stability and very good adhesion to the tooth
structure.
RelyX Unicem cement is available in 3M™ ESPE™ Aplicap™ and Maxicap™ capsules and the
Clicker™ Dispenser.
Aplicap™ Capsules
Ideally suited for inlays, onlays, crowns and posts
Hygienic unidose (295 mg per capsule)
Consistent mix with triturator
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
Elongation Tip available for virtually void-free cementation of posts
Available shades: A1, A2 Universal, A3 Opaque, White Opaque and Translucent
RelyX™ Unicem - Delivery choicesMaxicap™ Capsules
Ideally suited for multiple-unit bridges
Hygienic unidose (936 mg per capsule)
Consistent mix with triturator
Longer working time (2:30 min)
Available shades: A2 Universal, A3 Opaque and Translucent
Clicker™ Dispenser
Suited for all sizes of restorations
Choose amount dispensed; 11 g dispensable in 80 clicks (approx. 40 applications)
Delivers premeasured doses for consistent ratio of pastes; easy, economical mixing
No need for mixer, activator, appliers, mixing tips or other devices
Available shades: A2 Universal, A3 Opaque and Translucent
RelyX™ Unicem - Benefits
• Eliminates the need for etching, priming and bonding steps
• Strong, adhesive, esthetic and moisture-tolerant
• Easy to use for virtually all indications (except veneers and Maryland bridges)
• Low risk of postoperative sensitivities
• Clinically proven with years of scientific data and independent university studies available
• Releases fluoride over a long period of time
6
2. IndicationsRelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement is indicated for the permanent cemen-
tation of inlays, onlays, crowns, bridges, posts, and screws made of ceramics, composite or
metals.
3. History of Dental CementsToday’s dental cements can be traced back to the 19th century. As early as 1856, Sorel was put-
ting together formulations for magnesium chloride cement. The continuous search for better
materials led to numerous developments over the years.
According to their chemical composition, today’s commonly used dental cements are classified
into the following groups:
• Zinc phosphate cements
• Polycarboxylate cements
• Glass ionomer cements
• Resin-modified glass ionomer cements
• Compomer cements
• Adhesive resin cements
• Self-adhesive resin cements
While conventional cements offer easy handling, adhesive resin cements (also referred to as
composite resin cements) are highly versatile and provide strong adhesion and high esthetics
which is especially important for the cementation of state-of-the-art all-ceramic restorations.
However, this comes at the expense of easy and fast application. Various pretreatment steps
(etching, priming, bonding) and the absolute exclusion of moisture (rubber dam) are necessary
to successfully use adhesive cements. Therefore, adhesive cementation is much more technique
sensitive than conventional cementation and the clinical success may be compromised by the
technical challenges it imposes on the dentist.
These drawbacks were resolved with the introduction of the first self-adhesive universal resin
cement RelyX Unicem in 2002.
Table 1: Strength and weak-nesses of commonly used dentalcements.
Conventional cements
Hybrid cements}}
} Composite resin cements
General overview of cement classes. Specific products may exhibit deviating characteristics.1 Ratings here refer to RelyX Unicem cement. Some other so-called self-adhesive cements may not exhibit the same characteristics.2 For some products a conditioning step is recommended.3 Some products belonging to this class may include a self-etch primer / bonding system.4 Not all resin cements are recommended for dark cure only.5 Not applicable / not recommended.
Bond strength
Typical pretreatment steps
Metal
Composite
Indications Glass-ceramic
High strengthceramics
Low solubility (insoluble)
Mechanical properties
Esthetics
Zinc phosphatecements
★
–
★★★
n. a.5
n. a.
n. a.
★
★
★
Cement classes
Properties
Polycar-boxylatecements
★
–
★★★
n. a.
n. a.
n. a.
★
★
★
Glassionomercements
★★
–2
★★★
n. a.
n. a.
★★
★
★★
★
Resin-modifiedglass ionomer
cements
★★
–
★★★
n. a.
n. a.
★★
★★
★★
★
Adhesive resincements
★★★
etching3, priming, bonding
★4
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
Self-adhesive universal resin
cements1
★★★
–
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
★★★
Compomercements
★★
conditioning
★★
★
n. a.
★
★★
★★
★★
7
4. Chemical CompositionRelyX™ Unicem cement is available in two formulations: as a powder / liquid system in the
3M ESPE Aplicap™ and Maxicap™ Capsules, as a paste / paste system in the 3M ESPE
Clicker™ Dispenser. The qualitative composition of both formulations is shown in Table 2.
The ideal combination of easy handling known from conventional cements plus a bond strength
comparable to that of adhesive resin systems demanded developing new monomers, new fillers,
and new initiators.
Fig. 1: RelyX™ Unicem cementcombines glass ionomer, adhe-sive and composite technology.
Table 2: Chemical composition ofRelyX™ Unicem cement in thecapsule and the Clicker version.
Bond strength value see chapter 11.2(p. 22)
• alkaline (basic) fillers• silanated fillers
• phosphoric acid modified methacrylate monomers• methacrylate monomers
• initiators
RelyX™ UnicemSelf-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement
Glass ionomer technology
Adhesive technology
Composite cement technology
Powder
Alkaline (basic) fillers
Silanated fillers
Initiator components
Pigments
Base paste (white)
Methacrylate monomers containing phosphoric acid groups
Methacrylate monomers
Silanated fillers
Initiator components
Stabilizers
Liquid
Methacrylate monomers containing phosphoric acid groups
Methacrylate monomers
Initiator components
Stabilizers
Catalyst paste (yellow)
Methacrylate monomers
Alkaline (basic) fillers
Silanated fillers
Initiator components
Stabilizers
Pigments
8
4.1. New Monomers
Dental cements have to excel in the following areas: adhesion, mechanical properties, long-
term stability, esthetics and biocompatibility. In order to provide RelyX™ Unicem cement with
optimal properties and self-adhesion, the adhesive monomers were optimized. Several phos-
phoric acid groups and carbon double bonds per molecule are characteristic for the acidic
methacrylate monomers in RelyX Unicem cement. Whereas the phosphoric acid groups con-
tribute to self-adhesion, the carbon double bonds bring about a high reactivity of the methacry-
late monomers with each other. Thus after setting of RelyX Unicem cement, the resin matrix
shows a high degree of cross-linking between the particular mono-mers. In this way good
mechanical properties (e.g. high compressive and flexural strength) and adhesive bonding with-
out pretreatment of the tooth structure can be achieved. Furthermore, a high degree of cross-
linking is one essential requirement for the long-term stability of the cement which is met by
RelyX Unicem.
4.2. New Fillers
Fillers have also an important impact on the cement’s properties. One part of the fillers in
RelyX Unicem cement is silanated and, thus, is chemically embedded into the cement matrix
during setting. Another part is alkaline (basic) and thereby able to react with the phosphoric
acid groups of the methacrylate monomers in a neutralization reaction. Therefore, during set-
ting the pH-value increases and lifts the initially acidic RelyX Unicem cement paste to a neutral
level. This avoids hydrolysis processes in the cement in the long run and is therefore another
important prerequisite for the long-term stability of any initially acidic cement. Additionally,
during the neutralization reaction fluoride ions are released from the fillers. RelyX Unicem
cement provides these ions to the tooth structure without containing soluble fluoride salts in the
cement matrix. The amount of inorganic fillers contained in RelyX Unicem cement approxi-
mates 70 percent by weight and 50% by volume with the grain particle size (d[90]=90% of the
fillers) being <12.5µm. The fillers also account for the cement’s radiopacity.
4.3. New Initiator Systems
In dental technology most initiator systems for self curing (= chemical / dark curing) are based
on alkaline (basic) amines. However, these are deactivated in an acidic environment which
would inhibit self curing. For this reason, a completely new dual-curing initiator system was
developed to function in the initially acidic RelyX Unicem cement paste. It is characterized by
moisture tolerance and the ability to effectively initiate the polymerization reaction in a wide
pH-range. This ensures that the first step on the way to a highly cross-linked cement matrix
proceeds most effectively. Thus, in addition to innovative monomers and fillers, the initiator
system, too, contributes to a permanently strong bond strength and stability of RelyX Unicem
cement.
5. Setting ReactionsThe setting of RelyX Unicem cement is started either by a curing light or by the chemical reac-
tion of the initiator system. The main setting reaction is a radical polymerization reaction by
which the single monomer molecules are chemically cross-linked to form a three-dimensional
polymer network. Simultaneously, but to a minor extent, neutralization reactions take place,
which are important for the properties of the set RelyX Unicem cement. The following figures
illustrate in a simplified way the reactions that occur simultaneously during the setting of
RelyX Unicem cement.
Mechanical properties see chapter 7(p. 9)
pH-profile see chapter 6.2 (p. 8)
Hydrophilicity see chapter 6.1 (p. 8)
Working and curing times see chapter 13 (p. 47)
9
Acidic methacrylatemonomers contain phosphor-ic acid groups and reactivecarbon double bonds whichare connected with each othervia a carbon backbone.
The main components ofRelyX™ Unicem cement are:
• Methacrylate monomers,partially containing phos-phoric acid groups
• Fillers, one part releasingions, another part is silanated
• Chemical initiator system
• Light initiator system
1
4
2
5
3
6
The remaining phosphoricacid groups of the methacry-late monomers are neutral-ized by ions, which arereleased from the fillers dur-ing the setting reactions.
After mixing, RelyX™ Unicemcement is very acidic (lowpH-value) and hydrophilic(water binding). Upon contactwith the tooth surface thenegatively charged phosphoricacid groups of the methacry-late monomers bond to Ca2+-ions in the tooth structure.Thus, the phosphoric acidgroups are neutralized (i.e.pH rises) and anchored at thetooth surface.
Next to the restoration materi-al enamel and dentin are thesubstrates to which dentalcement has to show safe andreliable adhesion. The toothsubstance (enamel and dentin)consists of inorganic apatite-crystals containing calciumand organic collagen fibers.Additionally, the tooth struc-ture contains water.
The released fluoride ions areabsorbed by the tooth struc-ture.
Methacrylate-monomers
Initiators
Fillerscontaining
Calcium-Ions
Alumina-Ions
Strontium-Ions
Fluoride-Ions
Calcium-Ions on tooth substance (apatite)
Reactive carbondouble bond
Phosphoric acidgroup
Carbon-backbone
The methacrylate monomersare chemically cross-linkedwith each other through theinteraction of reactive carbondouble bonds.
Simultaneously, setting of thecement takes place throughthe radical polymerizationreaction of the methacrylatemonomers.
The initiator system generatesthe necessary starter radicalsthrough light-induced orchemical activation.
The methacrylate monomersand fillers are firmly linkedand permanently embedded inthe three-dimensional networkof the cement matrix.
RelyX™ Unicem cement iscured by the radical polymer-ization reaction. Thus, succes-sively a highly cross-linkedthree-dimensional networkis formed consisting ofmethacrylate molecules andfillers. During this process thecement matrix changes froman initially hydrophilic to ahydrophobic condition.
7 8
109
Fig. 2: Simplified depiction of the setting reactions of RelyX™ Unicem cement.
10
6. Active Transformation
6.1. Hydrophilic – Hydrophobic
Immediately after mixing RelyX™ Unicem, the cement paste is very acidic and has hydrophilic
properties. Therefore it shows a higher moisture tolerance than multi-step composite cements.
This together with the good adaptation to the hydrophilic tooth surface is the immediate advan-
tage for the dentist during the very first steps of the clinical cementation procedure. The result-
ing high bond strength is one prerequisite for a long-lasting success of the restoration. During
setting of RelyX Unicem cement a strongly cross-linked cement matrix with hydrophobic pro-
perties develops through the proceeding radical polymerization and the subordinate neutraliza-
tion reactions. A low linear expansion and low solubility are the results and lead to the clinical-
ly proven, long-term stability which plays a central role especially for all-ceramic restorations.
Thus, RelyX Unicem cement automatically changes its properties from hydrophilic to
hydrophobic during setting.
6.2. Acidic – Neutral
Parallel to the change from a hydrophilic to a hydrophobic state the pH-value increases during
the setting of RelyX Unicem cement. Immediately after mixing RelyX Unicem, the cement
paste is very acidic. Within a few minutes the pH-value starts to increase and within 24 hours
reaches a neutral level. After application to the tooth, the low pH-value of RelyX Unicem
cement is pivotal for the self-adhesive mechanism, whereas the pH increase as well as the
hydrophobic condition are essential prerequisites for the long-term hydrolytic stability of the
cement.
ph
alkaline
acidic
time after mixing [days]
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 30
time after mixing [hours]
HydrophilicGood adaptation tothe tooth surfacemoisture tolerance
Low expansionLow solubilityHigh long-term stability
Hydrophobic
Polymerization and neutralization reactions
Hydrophilic: water binding
Hydrophobic: water repelling
Fig. 3: RelyX™ Unicem cementchanges its properties fromhydrophilic to hydrophobic during setting.
Fig. 4: pH-profile of RelyX™
Unicem cement (3M ESPE internal lab data, 2007).
11
7. Mechanical Properties
7.1. Linear Expansion
Dimensional stability of a cement is an important consideration especially when cementing all-
ceramic restorations. In order to simulate the worst case scenario specimens of the cement to be
tested are immersed in water over months or years. In this way the counteracting effect of even-
tual initial polymerization shrinkage can be ruled out. RelyX™ Unicem cement both in the
Aplicap™ and in the Clicker™ Dispenser show comparable and low expansion values that prove
it to be safe for the cementation of all-ceramic restorations.
7.2. Mechanical Properties Overview
[%]
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54
time [months]
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
LIGHT / SELF cure
Fig. 5: Linear expansion of RelyX™ Unicem cement (3M ESPE internal lab data, 2007).
Table 3: Mechanical properties of RelyX™ Unicem cement.
Flexural strength [MPa]
Compressive strength [MPa]
Modulus of elasticity [GPa]
Surface hardness [MPa]
Radiopacity [mm Al]
Film thickness [µm]
Water sorption [µg/mm3]
Solubility [µg/mm3]
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ – Maxicap™
(SELF – LIGHT cure)
48 / 75
188 / 236
4.9 / 8.4
202 / 280
2.43
18 / -
39 / 25
15 / -3
RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
(SELF – LIGHT cure)
60 / 71
216 / 244
3.9 / 6.3
195 / 220
1.79
17 / -
42 / 25
12 / 1
Delivery versions
Properties
12
8. Clinical Application of RelyX™
Unicem CementAs discussed earlier, adhesive cementation poses a recurring technical challenge for dentists
and dental assistants. In comparison to RelyX Unicem cement, a composite cement with an
adhesive bonding system requires many more steps to securely bond a restoration to the tooth
structure.
Typical total-etch resin cement system
Cementing Steps
Initial situation:Provisional restorationremoved and preparedtooth cleaned.
Thoroughly rinse withwater.
Etch with a phosphoricacid etching gel.
Lightly dry with oil-free andanhydrous air or blot dryexcess water. Do not overdry.
Apply primer with a dis-posable applicator and rubin thoroughly.
Dry primer in a light air stream.Avoid direct blowing, as excessmay coagulate.
Apply adhesive with adisposable applicatorand rub in thoroughly.
Light cure adhesive ifindicated.
Mix cement and apply to theprepared restoration and/orthe prepared tooth. (Direct apli-cation with Applicap™ or Maxicap™
Capsule system possible)
Lightly thin or air dry adhesi-ve evenly with an air stream.Avoid coagulation of theadhesive.
Place the restoration.
Remove excess.
Light cure or allow to selfcure.
Final situation:Adhesively cementedceramic crown.
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Cementation withRelyX™ Unicem Cement
13
9. Pretreatment of RestorativeMaterials
To assure optimal bond strength to the restoration 3M ESPE recommends the following proce-
dures for the cementation with RelyX™ Unicem cement as long as not stated differently by the
manufacturer of the restorative material.
Please refer to the instructions for use supplied with each package of RelyX Unicem cement
before usage.
*While these pretreatment steps are essential for many composite resin cements, RelyX™ Unicem cement exhibits sufficient bondstrength also with the more simple alternative 1 (see study results, page 27 fig. 29).
10. Official RatingsSince its market introduction in 2002 RelyX Unicem cement continually received high ratings
from several independent research institutes. Listed is a selection of the more recent awards:
RelyX Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement was selected “Most Innovative New
Product of the Year” for 2004 by REALITY.
RelyX Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement was rated 4-STARS by REALITY
since its first evaluation in 2003
(Reality Now, Vol. 17, No. 153, June 2003)
4-year Clinical Performance
4,000 indirect restorations of different types were cemented with RelyX Unicem cement and
evaluated after 4 years in service. THE DENTAL ADVISOR reconfirmed its top rating of 5+,
which were already awarded for the 1-, 2- and 3-year recall. It reports on outstanding results in
all evaluated categories: handling, sensitivity, microleakage and retention.
(THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Vol. 24, No. 4, May 2007)
Bond strength value see page 22
Restorative material type
Metal (precious and non-precious)
Etchable Glass Ceramics(e.g. ParadigmTM C, 3M ESPE;Vitablocs® Mark II, Vident;Authentic®, Microstar®;IPS-Empress®, Ivoclar Vivadent;ProCAD®, Ivoclar Vivadent)
Non-etchable Zirconia and AluminaCeramics(e. g. LavaTM, 3M ESPE;Cercon®, Dentsply; Procera® AllCeram,Nobel Biocare)
Composite(e. g. ParadigmTM MZ100, 3M ESPE;Artglass, Heraeus Kulzer;belleGlassTM NG, Kerr)
RelyXTM Fiber Post (3M ESPE)
Other glass fiber reinforced posts
Pretreatment
Sandblast with aluminum oxide 40 µmClean with alcohol
Etch with hydrofluoric acidSilanate (e. g. RelyXTM Ceramic Primer, 3M ESPE)
Alternative 1:Sandblast with aluminum oxide 40µmClean with alcoholAlternative 2:*Coat (silicate) (e. g. CoJetTM Prep and CoJetTM Sand, 3M ESPE)Silanate (e. g. RelyXTM Ceramic Primer, 3M ESPE)
Sandblast with aluminum oxide 40µmClean with alcohol
No pretreatment necessary if cemented with RelyX Unicemcement
Clean with alcoholSilanate
14
11. Study ResultsAlong with the dentist's technical expertise and the restorative material's properties, the per-
formance of the cement contributes significantly to the clinical success of indirect restorations.
The following properties are especially important for a universal cement, which is indicated for
cementation of metal, composite and ceramic restorations:
• High adhesion to the tooth structure and restorative materials
• High marginal quality
• Very good mechanical properties
• Low risk of postoperative sensitivities
• Very good long-term stability
Since the market introduction of RelyX™ Unicem cement in 2002 more than 80 studies have
been carried out internationally, which investigate these and other properties. The most impor-
tant results are presented and discussed in the following chapter. It provides an overview on
clinical as well as in vitro studies.
11.1. Clinical in vivo Studies
Although in vitro tests are helpful in comparing and assessing a material’s properties, the final
proof for a dental material’s performance is clinical trials. The following pages provide an
overview of the clinical performance of RelyX Unicem cement.
Clinical Performance of Ceramic In- and Onlays after 3 Years
Study design and results:
Posterior class I and II restorations in 30 patients were restored with ceramic in- and onlays
(Authentic®, Microstar) using either RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement
(Aplicap™) or the multi-step bonding system Syntac® Classic and Variolink® II incl. the multi-
step bonding system Syntac Classic (both Ivoclar Vivadent). Cementation was done according
to the cement manufacturers’ instructions for use. For the 3-year recall, 50 restored teeth were
evaluated following the modified Ryge criteria for clinical evaluations (see table 5).
Marginal adaptation Color match Marginaldiscoloration
Surface roughness Absence of caries0
20
40
[%] 60
80
100
Variolink II®
alpha scores
delta scores
RelyX™ Unicem alpha scores bravo scores
bravo scores
RelyX™ Unicem Collection of ScientificResults
Clinical Outcomes of Ceramic Inlays /Onlays Luted With Two BondingSystems.Denehy G., Stanford C., Cobb D.,Vargas M. et al. 2007University of Iowa, USAunpublished study
Fig. 6: Clinical performance after3 years of ceramic in- and onlaysseated with RelyX™ Unicem ce-ment (Aplicap™) and Variolink® II.
15
Conclusions:
The authors of the study state: "The three year outcomes of this study suggest that there is
equivalent clinical performance of the self etching RelyX™ Unicem system relative to the com-
parison group. These clinical efficacy outcomes are important since the RelyX Unicem cement
system uses a simplified clinical set of procedures while providing equivalent outcomes to the
more complex, multi-step set of clinical procedures used in the Variolink® II group."
Clinical Performance of Ceramic In- and Onlays after 1 Year
Study design and results:
IPS-Empress® (Ivoclar Vivadent) restorations (70 Class 2 inlays, 13 onlays / 47 premolars,
36 molars) were placed in 30 patients in a split mouth design. 43 inlays/onlays were seated with
RelyX Unicem cement (Maxicap™). The multi-step adhesive Syntac® Classic and Variolink II
low (both Ivoclar Vivadent) served as a control (n=40). The inlays were pretreated according to
the cement manufacturers’ instructions for use (HF-etching and silanating). Additionally, in the
Variolink group Heliobond™ (Ivoclar Vivadent) was applied to the restorations. After one year
the restorations were evaluated using modified Ryge criteria.
0
20
40
[%]
60
80
100
Marginal integrity Integrity of tooth Surface roughness Proximal contact
Variolink II®
alpha 1 scores alpha 2 scores bravo scoresRelyX™ Unicem
alpha 1 scores alpha 2 scores bravo scores
Table 5: Modified Ryge criteriafor the clinical evaluation of in-and onlay restorations
Ceramic Inlays Luted with a Self-Adhesive Cement After one YearTaschner M., Frankenberger R.,Petschelt A., Krämer N.University of Erlangen, GermanyPublished at the AADR 2006abstract #1361
Fig. 7: Clinical performance ofceramic in- / onlays seated with RelyX™ Unicem cement(Maxicap™) and Variolink® II low after 1 year.
Criteria
Marginal adaptation
Color match
Marginal discoloration
Surface roughness
Absence of caries
Alpha scores
Explorer does not catch
Good match in color, shade, and translucency
No discoloration evident atmargin
Smooth surface
Alpha scores
No caries
Bravo scores
Explorer catches
Slight mismatch in color, shade, and translucency
Slight staining at margin
Slightly rough or pitted
Delta scores
Caries evident at the margins of the restoration
16
Criteria
Marginal integrity
Integrity of tooth
Proximal contact
Surface roughness
Alpha 1 scores
Margin matches restoration andtooth perfectly inshape and color
Complete integrity
Physiological contact
Smooth and polished surface
Alpha 2 scores
Margin does not match perfectly but can be polished without causing damage to do so
Minor enamel crack or hair-line split
Contact is too weak or too strong
Slightly rough surface; can be polished
Bravo scores
Marginal gap withno negative long-term consequences
Clear enamel crack with no negativelong-term conse-quences
Contact is far tooweak; but no indi-cation of tissuedamage
Rough surface; can not be polishedwithout causingdamage
Table 6: Modified Ryge criteria forthe clinical evaluation of in- andonlay restorations
Conclusions:
After one year RelyX™ Unicem cement (Maxicap™) performed similar to the control.
Furthermore, this study highlights the lack of hypersensitivities both in the control group as
well as with RelyX Unicem cement.
Clinical Performance of Composite, All ceramic, andPFM Restorations after 4 Years
Study design and results:
Over 4,400 restorations have been cemented with RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap™/Maxicap™)
between 2003 and 2006 by the evaluators of THE DENTAL ADVISOR. The distribution of
indications and materials was as shown in the chart below. 1,560 restorations were available for
recall and 230 of these have been cemented for 4 years.
Conclusions:
According to THE DENTAL ADVISOR “RelyX Unicem cement has proven to be an excellent
and reliable self-adhesive resin cement in the four years since its introduction”.
Overall, RelyX Unicem cement showed 98% positive clinical performance and received
5 plus – the highest rating by THE DENTAL ADVISOR.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Microleakage(based on 1,560 restorations)
no microleakage 95,8%
microleakage 4,2%
Post-Operative Sensitivity(based on 1,560 restorations)
post-operative sensitivity 1,6%
no post-operative sensitivity 98,2%
Debonding(based on 4,400 restorations)
debonding no debonding 99,3% 0,7%
PFMcrowns/bridges
all-ceramiccrowns/bridges
all-ceramicin-/onlays
posts
3M™ ESPE™ RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement 4-year Clinical PerformanceTHE DENTAL ADVISOR, Vol. 4, No. 4,May 2007
Fig. 8: Indications and restora-tive material types cemented with RelyX™ Unicem cement(Aplicap™).
Fig. 9: Clinical performance ofrestorations cemented withRelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™)after 4 years.
17
Clinical Performance of Metal, Ceramic and PFM Restorations after 2 Years
Study design and results:
90 restorations (mean age 21-months) in 82 patients have been seated by general dental practi-
tioners and were available for recall. Four restorations were reported to have failed for reasons
(root fracture, porcelain fracture, and unrelated enamel chipping), deemed by the operator,
unconnected with the use of RelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™).
Conclusions:
Over a mean 21-month observation time the RelyX Unicem self-adhesive universal resin
cement (Aplicap) was rated to perform well and no cement-related failures were observed.
[%]0 20 40 60 80 100
No discoloration
Marginal staining
present
Slight staining present,can be polished away
Obvious staining,cannot be polished away
Gross staining‡ *
* none detected‡ clinically unacceptable
[%]
Marginal adaptation0 20 40 60 80 100
Explorer does notcatch
Explorer catches, nocrevice visible
Crevice at margin,enamel margin exposed‡
Obvious crevice atmargin, dentine or lute exposed‡
* none detected‡ clinically unacceptable
*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
all-metal PFM fiber post all-ceramic
Two-year Performance of RestorationsPlaced with a Self-Adhesive LutingMaterialCrisp R.J., Burke F.J.T., University ofBirmingham, UKPublished at the IADR 2006, abstract#2098
Fig. 10: Types of restorative materials used for restorationsseated with RelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™).
Fig. 11: Marginal adaptation of various restorations 2 years aftercementation with RelyX™ Unicemcement (Aplicap™).
Fig. 12: Marginal staining of variousrestorations 2 years after cementa-tion with RelyX™ Unicem cement(Aplicap™).
18
Clinical Performance of Endodontic Posts after 3 Years
Study design and results:
45 patients were treated using a titanium post (Fiberpoints Root Pins Titanium) and 46 patients
received a glass fiber post (Fiberpoints Root Pins Glass, both Schuetz Dental Group). All posts
had a diameter of 1.4mm and a length of 13mm and were cemented with RelyX™ Unicem
cement (Aplicap™). All teeth received a core build-up. Patients were observed in regular inter-
vals after post placement.
Conclusions:
After 1 to 3 years of clinical service all the restorations were still in place and no difference was
observed between the two post materials tested. Therefore, RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap) is
very well suited for any kind of post cementation.
Human Pulp Response to Resin Luting Cements
Study design and results:
Deep Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface of 34 sound human premolars.
Inlays were fabricated and cemented with either RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap) or
Variolink® II / Excite® DSC (Ivoclar Vivadent). 60 days after cementation the teeth were
extracted and processed for histological assessment. In both control groups (group 1: cavity
was lined with Dycal®, Dentsply Caulk prior to cementation with RelyX Unicem cement;
group 2: teeth were left untreated), normal histological characteristics were observed.
Conclusions:
Teeth that had received an inlay cemented with the one-step RelyX Unicem cement showed a
lower inflammatory cell response than teeth treated with a multi-step resin cement.
11.2. In vitro Studies
Measuring Bond Strength
The following chapter provides an overview on in vitro studies mainly measuring bond strength
values to tooth structure or various restorative materials.
Although the output of most measurements is given in MPa (i.e. mega Pascal; Pascal is a meas-
ure for pressure equaling Newton (N) per m2) absolute numbers resulting from different studies
cannot simply be compared for severeal reasons. First and foremost, bond strength can be
FRC vs. Titanium Posts-PreliminaryResults of a RCTNaumann M.1, Sterzenbach G.2,Blankenstein F.2,Lange K.-P.2
1Humboldt-University Berlin, Charite -University Medicine, Germany2Humboldt-University Berlin, Germany;Published at the IADR 2006, abstract#0077
Human Pulp Response to ResinCements Used to Bond InlayRestorationsCosta C.A. de S.1, Hebling J.2,Randall R.C.2
1University Sao Paulo State-UNESP,Sao Paulo, Brasilia23M ESPE, St. Paul, USAJournal of Dental Materials, No. 22,2006, 954–962
Fig. 13: Inflammatory cellresponse in the pulp area 60 daysafter cementation of an inlay(teeth per group = 6).
[%]
0
20
40
60
80
100
none slight moderate severe
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™Variolink II
* none detected
* *
®
19
determined using methodologies that differ in their experimental set-up. Second, even if the
same set-up is used, experimenters can come to differing results due to the influence of a num-
ber of factors such as:
• teeth from different species and / or different individuals
• way of securing the teeth for preparation and testing
• kind of surface preparation (grit of sandpaper)
• geometry of the substrate and the sample
• differences in the handling between operators
• cross-head speed of the testing machine
Therefore, absolute numbers should only be compared if retrieved in the same experiment. In
general, this calls for study designs where a broad range of products is investigated side by side
under the same conditions.
To determine the bond strength of a cement at different points of time after seating of the
restoration test samples can be subjected to different treatments. To examine immediate bond
strength, the cement is cured and the samples are tested. Simulation of long-term clinical per-
formance and aging can include one or a combination of the following treatments:
• water storage over an extended period of time
• thermocycling
• mechanical loading.
The principle of a number of test methods is described briefly in the following. Only the very
basics of the particular method are given here and numerous modifications exist according to
requirements of the aim of the study and the operator.
Shear Bond Strength
In the studies cited here, the shear bond strength has been determined using two different
experimental set-ups. One set-up uses a wedge-like instrument (fig. 14) to shear off the luted
composite sample. The other method uses a wire loop (fig. 15). In both cases the shear force
is applied parallel to the sample surface.
• Extracted teeth are embeddedinto resin or impression material.
• Teeth are cut with saws and/orground with sandpaper to obtaina flat surface in either dentin orenamel.
• The tooth structure is preparedfollowing the Instructions for Usegiven by the manufacturer of theparticular cement to be tested.
• Alternatively, bond strength torestorative materials (e. g. metals,ceramics, composite) can bedetermined if the tooth isreplaced by a specimen of thematerial under investigation.
• A button like specimen (e. g.made from composite) with adefined bonding surface area iscemented to the tooth surface.In an alternative set-up the button–like specimen itself ismade of the cement to be test-ed. To this end a cylindrical orbutton-like mold is placed ontothe tooth surface and filled withthe cement.
• Samples may be stored for dif-ferent lengths of time and/orthermocycled according to thedesign of the experiment tosimulate aging.
• For determining the shearbond strength of the cementthe test sample is mountedinto a universal testingmachine.
• If a wedge-like instrument isused the force needed to shearoff the composite specimen ata given speed is recorded andthe corresponding bondstrength (pressure) is calcu-lated.
Fig. 14: Simplified depiction of aset-up to determine the shearbond strength using a wedgeshaped instrument. The cement is shown as red line.
20
The force needed to break offthe composite specimen isrecorded accordingly if a wireloop is used.
see above see above
Fig. 15: Simplified depiction of aset-up to determine the shearbond strength using a wire loop.
Fig. 17: Simplified depiction of a set-up to determine the tensilebond strength on root canalposts.
Fig. 16: Simplified depiction of aset-up to determine the tensilebond strength.
Tensile Bond Strength
For tensile testing samples are prepared as described above for determining shear bond
strength. In this test, however, specimens are pulled off with the force applied perpendicular to
the sample surface.
The tensile bond strength test method can be modified to determine the bond strength of
cements to root canal posts.
The force needed to pull offthe composite specimen isrecorded and the correspon-ding bond strength (pressure)calculated.
A plastic carrier is slipped ontothe conical end of the post. Eachsample shows the same length ofthe post tip.
A standardized mold on the plastic carrier is used to applythe same amount of cement toeach of the samples.
After curing, the cement disc ispulled off in a universal testingmachine.
see above see above
21
Fig. 18: Simplified depiction of aset-up to determine the microten-sile bond strength.
Fig. 19: Simplified depiction of aset-up to determine retentivebond strength using full crowns.The cement is shown as red line /surface.
Microtensile Bond Strength
Retentive Bond Strength of Full Crowns
This test is a variation of the tensile bond strength test.
Retentive Bond Strength of Fiber Posts
Similar to a full crown test, the retention of a root canal post can be simulated. After extraction,
teeth are endodontically treated and the root canal is filled with guttapercha. In the second
preparation step the guttapercha filling is removed and a post is cemented into the root canal in
a standardized way. The force needed to extract the post from the tooth is recorded.
• Extracted (human) teeth are pre-pared for full crowns in a stan-dardized manner. The root area of the teeth is embedded into aresin block for mounting into auniversal testing machine.
• Crowns with external reten-tions are fabricated and ce-mented using the cements tobe tested.
• The force necessary to pull offeach crown is measured. Afterdetermining the retention sur-face of each individual tooththe retentive bond strength iscalculated.
• The tooth is cut to either showenamel or dentin surface. A com-posite block is then cemented tothe exposed tooth surface usingthe cement to be tested.
• After setting rectangular beamsare cut out with a diamondsaw.
• Each beam is mounted into auniversal testing machine andbond strength is determined.
22
Shear Bond Strength of Different Classes of Cements to Human Dentin
Study design and results:
The dentin of extracted human molars was prepared by grinding with sandpaper (600 grit).
Each cement system was used according to the manufacturer’s instructions for use. One half of
the samples was tested at 30 minutes the other half after 14 days of water storage and subse-
quent thermocycling (1,000 x 5/55°C) (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
The one-step RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement (Aplicap™) shows
comparable results as the multi-step adhesive bonding system Panavia™ F. This is true for both
curing modes and for bond strength values measured 30 min after cementation and after
simulated aging.
Shear Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel andLava™ Ceramic Immediately and after 24 Hours
Study design and results:
Polished surfaces (1,000 grit) of human dentin, enamel and Lava zirconia ceramic samples
were prepared. The Lava surface was sandblasted (50µm Al2O3). Composite inlays (Filtek™
Z250, 3M ESPE) were fabricated and luted to the substrate samples using the three resin
cements (RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap), 3M ESPE; Maxcem™, Kerr; Panavia F 2.0,
Kuraray). The shear bond strength of the cementation was measured using a universal testing
machine immediately and after one-day storage (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
[MP
a]
Fleck’s
™ ce
men
t
Fuji 1
Ketac
™ C
em A
plica
p™
Fuji P
lus
FujiCEM
RelyX™
Lut
ing (SC)
(LC)
RelyX™
Unic
em A
plica
p™(SC)
(LC)
Panav
ia™ F
/ ED P
rimer
™
Variol
ink® II
/ Syn
tac®
Classic
(LC)
(SC)
(LC)
RelyX™
ARC /
Scotch
bond
™ 1
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
30 min14d / thermocycling
* zinc phosphate cement
LC: LIGHT cureSC: SELF cure
Dentin Shear Bond Strength of VariousLuting CementsPiwowarczyk A.1, Lauer H.-Ch.1,Sorensen J.A.2
1Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University,Frankfurt, Germany2Oregon Health & Science University,Portland, USAPublished at the CED 2002, abstract#0215
Fig. 20: Shear bond strength tohuman dentin after 30 min and 14 days / thermocycling.
Effect of One-day Storage on Bondingof Self-Adhesive Resin CementsIrie M.1, Richter B.2, Suzuki K.1
1Okayama University Graduate School,Okayama, Japan23M ESPE, Seefeld, GermanyPublished at the AADR 2006 abstract#1839
23
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap) shows bond strength values that are comparable to the multi-
step cement Panavia F2.0 and superior to Maxcem on dentin. Generally, cement bond strength
values improve after 24 hours storage making differences to Maxcem more obvious.
Tensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel
Study design and results:
Extracted human third molars were grinded with sandpaper (600 grit) to expose dentin and
enamel surfaces. Composite specimens (Filtek™ Supreme, 3M ESPE) were cemented onto the
tooth structure following the cement manufacturers’ instructions for use. Three different self-
adhesive resin cements were used: RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap™) (3M ESPE), Maxcem™
(Kerr), and Embrace™ Wetbond™ (Pulpdent). After storing in water for 24 hours the tensile
bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see
chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement showed the same bond strength values in both curing modes. On human
dentin RelyX Unicem cement performed better than Embrace Wetbond and Maxcem.
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
immediately 24hrs immediately 24hrs immediately 24hrs
Maxcem™Panavia™ F 2.0 / Porc. Activ. / Mega PrimerRelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
Enamel Dentin Lava™
0
10
20
30
40
50
Embrace™*Wetbond™
Maxcem™ RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
Embrace™Wetbond™
Maxcem™ RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
SELF cure
LIGHT cure
Human DentinHuman Enamel
[MP
a]
* Enamel cemented with Embrace Wetbond (Pulpdent) was etched with phosphoric acid following manufacturer’s directions
Fig. 21: Shear bond strength tohuman enamel and dentin, andLava™ ceramic immediately andafter 24 hours.
In Vitro Bond Strength of AdhesiveCements to Tooth Structure.Pinzon L.M., Powers J.M.University of Texas Dental branch atHouston, USATHE DENTAL ADVISOR, ResearchReport, No. 1, June 2005
Fig. 22: Tensile bond strength tohuman enamel and dentin after24 hours.
24
Shear Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel after24 Hours and Thermocycling
Study design and results:
Extracted human molars were ground flat with sandpaper (600 grit) to expose dentin and
enamel surface. For cementation, RelyX™ Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the
Clicker™ Dispenser (3M ESPE) as well as Maxcem™ (Kerr) were used both in self and light
cure mode. One subgroup was tested after 24 hours water storage at 37°C; the other subgroup
was stored 14 days and subsequently thermocycled (1,000 x 5/55°C). Shear bond strength was
determined in a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement both from the Aplicap Capsule and the Clicker Dispenser show similar
performance. RelyX Unicem cement bond strength values do not decrease after thermocycling.
Microtensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin andEnamel
Study design and results:
Extracted human third molars were flattened using a diamond bur to expose enamel or dentin
surfaces. Composite specimens (Paradigm™ MZ100, 3M ESPE) were luted to the tooth sub-
strate using four different cements requiring an adhesive bonding system: Linkmax (GC),
Nexus® 2™ (Kerr), Variolink® II (Ivoclar Vivadent), Panavia™ F (Kuraray) and one self-adhesive
universal resin cement: RelyX Unicem (Aplicap). All cementations were done following the
manufacturers' instructions for use. The specimens were stored for 24 hours in distilled water
at 37°C prior to testing in a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
C
licke
r™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
Apl
icap
™
Max
Cem
™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
C
licke
r™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
Apl
icap
™
Max
Cem
™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
C
licke
r™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
Apl
icap
™
Max
Cem
™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
C
licke
r™
Rel
yX™
Uni
cem
Apl
icap
™
Max
Cem
™
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
SELF cure LIGHT cure
24hrs
14d+TC
24hrs
14d+TC
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
SELF cure LIGHT cure
TC: thermocycling (1,000x 5/55°C)
Human Enamel Human Dentin
TC: thermocycling (1,000x 5/55°C)
[MP
a]
[MP
a]
Bond Strength of Self-AdhesiveCementing Agents to Dentin andEnamelPiwowarczyk A., Bregulla J., Lauer H.-C.Johann Wolfgang Goethe-UniversityFrankfurt, GermanyPublished at the IADR 2007, abstract#1540
Fig. 23: Shear bond strength tohuman enamel (left) and dentin(right) after 24 hours and thermo-cycling
Hikita K.1,2, De Munck J.1,2, Ishijima T.2,Maida T.2, Lam-brechts P.1,2, VanMeerbeek B.1,2
1Catholic University of Leuven,Netherlands2Health Sciences University ofHokkaido, Sapporo, JapanPublished at the IADR 2004,abstract #3175Bonding Effectiveness of AdhesiveLuting Agents to Enamel/Dentin
25
Conclusions:
All cements in the test showed equally good adhesion to dentin (see note for Variolink®).
All luting cements that require additional priming / bonding pretreatment steps showed higher
adhesion values to enamel.
Tensile Bond Strength to Human Dentin and Enamel
Study design and results:
Enamel and dentin specimens were prepared from non-carious third human molars (600 grit).
Composite cones (Filtek™ Z250, 3M ESPE) were cemented according to the cement manufac-
turers’ instructions for use using two resin cements that use adhesive bonding systems
(Calibra®) and the self-adhesive resin cement RelyX™ Unicem (Aplicap™). Cements were light
cured (40 sec) or self cured (15 min at 37°C). Tensile bond strength was determined using a
universal testing machine after 24 hours storage (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
The bond strength of RelyX Unicem cement is almost independent of the curing mode. RelyX
Unicem cement shows an especially high performance on dentin.
[MP
a]
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Linkmax Nexus® 2™ Variolink® II Panavia™ F RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
Human Enamel
[MP
a]
0
10
20
30
40
Linkmax Nexus® 2™ Variolink® II Panavia™ F RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
Human Dentin
* 10 out of 12 smaples failed before testing (Variolink II)
** 1 out of 10 samples failed before testing (RelyX Unicem)
*
**
[MP
a]
[MP
a]
0
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
Calibra®/Prime & Bond® NT™
Variolink® II/Syntac® Classic
0
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
Calibra®/Prime & Bond® NT™
Variolink® II/Syntac® Classic
LIGHT cureSELF cure
LIGHT cureSELF cure
Human Enamel Human Dentin
Fig. 24: Microtensile bondstrength to human enamel (left)and dentin (right) after 24 hours.
Fig. 25: Tensile bond strength tohuman enamel (left) and dentin(right) after 24 hours.
Bonding of a Novel Self-AdhesiveCement to Tooth SubstratesTrajtenberg C.P., Pinzon L.M., PowersJ.M.University of Texas Dental Branch atHouston, USAPublished at the AADR 2003, abstract#1197 revised
26
Immediate Shear Bond Strength to Bovine Dentin
Study design and results:
Bovine anterior teeth were ground flat with sandpaper (320 grit). Composite discs (Paradigm™
MZ 100, 3M ESPE) were cemented to the dentin according to the cement manufacturers’
instructions for use. All cements were light cured for 20 sec from each side. 5 minutes after
cement mixing the shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine
(experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
RelyX™ Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the Clicker™ Dispenser show the same
shear bond strength which prove to be among the highest of the cements tested.
Tensile Bond Strength to Bovine Dentin and Enamel
Study design and results:
Bovine teeth were ground flat with sandpaper (320 grit) to expose dentin and enamel surface.
The cements tested were applied to the tooth structure according to the cement manufacturers’
instructions for use forming a button-like structure. Tensile bond strength was determined after
24 hours storage using a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
[MP
a]
0
2
4
6
8
10
Maxcem™ Monocem MultilinkAutomix
Calibra® Panavia™ F2.0
RelyX™UnicemClicker™
RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
[MP
a]
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Harvard Fuji I FujiCEM Maxcem™ RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
RelyX™UnicemClicker™
LIGHT cure
SELF cure
n.a. n.a. n.a.
self-adhesive cementsconventional cements
Bovine Enamel
3M ESPE internal lab data (2006)
Fig. 26: Shear bond strength tobovine dentin 5 min after cemen-tation.
3M ESPE internal lab data (2006)
Fig. 27: Tensile bond strength ofdifferent luting cements to bovineenamel after 24 hours.
27
Conclusions:
RelyX™ Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the Clicker™ Dispenser show far superior
bond strength compared to the conventional cements tested.
Retentive Bond Strength of Lava™ Zirconia Crowns on Human Dentin
Study design and results:
Full crown preparations were performed on extracted human teeth in a standardized manner
simulating clinical conditions (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.). The resin cements and
the adhesive system were used according to manufacturers' instructions for use. With dual-
curing systems, only the self-curing approach was conducted. The crowns inner surfaces were
sandblasted (Rocatec™ Pre, 3M ESPE). After thermocycling (5,000 x 5/55°C), the bond
strength of 50% of the cemented ceramic crowns was determined using a universal testing
machine. The remaining samples were tested after 1 year of water storage. The retention sur-
face was determined individually for each tooth and retentive strength was calculated.
Conclusions:
Lava™ crowns cemented with RelyX Unicem cement showed the highest median retentive
strength initially and after 1 year in this clinically relevant study design. (Rocatec™ pretreatment
is not needed to improve RelyX Unicem cement retentive strength.)
[MP
a]
0
1
2
3
4
Harvard Fuji I FujiCEM Maxcem™ RelyX™UnicemAplicap™
RelyX™UnicemClicker™
n.a. n.a.n.a.
LIGHT cure
SELF cure
Bovine Dentin
self-adhesive cementsconventional cements
[MP
a]
Variol
ink® II
/Syn
tac®
Panav
ia™ F
2.0
Mult
ilink A
utom
ix /
Met
al Prim
er
Mult
ilink A
utom
ix /
Mon
obon
d S M
axce
m™
RelyX™
Unicem
Apli
cap™
RelyX™
Unic
em
Aplica
p™/R
ocat
ec™
Plus
FujiCEM
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TC
TC+1yr water storage
columns show median values bars represent 25th and 75th percentile TC: thermocycling (5,000x 5°C/55°C)
Fig. 28: Tensile bond strength ofdifferent luting cements to bovinedentin after 24 hours.
In Vitro Retentive Strength of Zircon-Oxide all Ceramic CrownsErnst C.-P., Askoy E., Stender E.,Willershausen B.Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz,GermanyPublished at the IADR PEF 2006,abstract #0248
Fig. 29: Retentive strength ofLava™ crowns on human dentinafter thermocycling and 1 yearwater storage
28
Shear Bond Strength to Zirconia Ceramic
Study design and results:
Zirconia specimens (Cercon®, Dentsply) were bonded to metal (CoCr) cylinders. All bonding
areas were first sandblasted (110µm Al2O3). Alloy-Primer (Kuraray) was applied on all metal
bonding surfaces. The following resin cements and bonding agents were used: Calibra® / Silane
/ Prime & Bond® NT™ and SRC (Dentsply), Maxcem™ (Kerr), Multilink® Automix / SR-Link
(Ivoclar Vivadent) , Multilink® Xpress (Ivoclar Vivadent), Panavia™ F 2.0 (Kuraray), RelyX™
Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the Clicker™ Dispenser (3M ESPE), Rocatec™ sili-
coating (3M ESPE). All cements were self cured at 37°C. The shear bond strength was deter-
mined after 24 hours, 30 days of water storage, and after 12,000 thermal cycles (5/55°C, 17d)
(experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
Regarding the shear bond strength of the zirconia / resin cement interface, both RelyX Unicem
self-adhesive universal resin cement in the Aplicap capsule and the Clicker dispenser per-
formed at a similarly high level. The shear bond strength of RelyX Unicem cement is less
susceptible to change after thermocycling and long-term water storage than most other
cements tested.
Shear Bond Strength of theZirconia/Resin InterfaceBehr M., Rosentritt M., Kolbeck C.,Lang R., Handel G.University of Regensburg, GermanyPublished at the IADR 2007 #2627
Fig. 30: Shear bond strength ofvarious resin cements (self cure)to zirconia ceramics at 24 hours,after thermocycling, and after 30 days water storage.
Calibr
a® (S
ilane
+
Prime
& Bon
d® N
T™+S
RC)
Max
cem
™ (n
o pr
imer
)
Mult
ilink A
utom
ix
(SR-L
ink)
Mult
ilink X
pres
s
(no
prim
er)
Panav
ia™ F
2.0
(no
prim
er)
Variol
ink® (R
ocat
ec)
cont
rol (
Variol
ink® ,
no p
rimer
)
RelyX™
Unic
em
Clicke
r™ (n
o pr
imer
)
RelyX™
Unic
em
Aplica
p™ (n
o pr
imer
)
RelyX™
Unic
em
Aplica
p™ (R
ocat
ec
silico
ating
)
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
24 hrs thermocycling (12,000 x 5/55°C) 30 d water storage
29
Shear Bond Strength to Lava™ Zirconia Ceramic andGlass Ceramic
Study design and results:
Lava™ (3M ESPE) zirconia samples were air-abraded (100µm Al2O3). IPS Empress® 2 (Ivoclar
Vivadent) leucite-reinforced glass ceramic samples were etched with hydrofluoric acid and
silanated (Monobond S, Ivoclar Vivadent). Composite samples were cemented onto the speci-
mens using different luting cements according to the cement manufacturers’ instructions for
use. Shear bond strength was tested in a universal testing machine after 30 min and after
14 days water storage and subsequent thermocycling (1,000 x 5/55°C) (experimental set-up
see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
Within the group of cements tested the shear bond strength of RelyX™ Unicem cement to zirco-
nia and glass ceramic is among the highest when light cured. Light curing is the preferred cur-
ing mode for all-ceramic restorations.
[MP
a]
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Fuji P
lus
FujiCEM
RelyX™
Lut
ing
RelyX™
ARC (S
C)
RelyX™
ARC (L
C)
Panav
ia™ F
(SC)
Panav
ia™ F
(LC)
Variol
ink® II
(SC)
Variol
ink® II
(LC)
RelyX™
Unic
em (S
C)
RelyX™
Unic
em (L
C)
30 min14d / thermocycling
LC: LIGHT cureSC: SELF cure
The Shear Bond Strength BetweenLuting Cements and Zirconia Ceramicafter two Pretreatments.Piwowarczyk A., Lauer H. C.,Sorensen J. A.Oper Dent. 2005 May-Jun; 30(3):382-8
In Vitro Shear Bond Strength ofCementing Agents to Fixed Prost-hodontic Restorative MaterialsPiwowarczyk A., Lauer H. C.,Sorensen J. A.; Johann WolfgangGoethe University of Frankfurt,GermanyJ Prosthet Dent. 2004 Sep; 92(3):265-73
Fig. 31: Shear bond strength ofdifferent luting cements toleucite-reinforced glass ceramicIPS Empress® 2 (Ivoclar Viva-dent) initially and after 14 dayswater storage and thermocycling(1,000 x 5/55°C).
[MP
a]
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Fleck’s
™ ce
men
t *
Fuji 1
Ketac
™ C
EM
Fuji P
lus
FujiCEM
RelyX™
Lut
ing (SC)
(LC)
RelyX™
Unic
em A
plica
p™(SC)
(LC)
Panav
ia™ F
(SC)
(LC)
Variol
ink® II
(SC)
(LC)
RelyX™
ARC
LC: LIGHT cureSC: SELF cure
30 min14d / thermocycling
* zinc phosphate cement Fig. 32: Shear bond strength ofdifferent luting cements to Lava™
zirconia ceramic initially and after14 days water storage and ther-mocycling (1,000 x 5/55°C).
30
Shear Bond Strength to Alumina Ceramic
Study design and results:
Procera® AllCeram (Nobel Biocare) specimens were air-abraded (100 µm Al2O3). Composite
samples were cemented onto the specimens using different luting cements according to the
cement manufacturers’ instructions for use. Dual cure cements were light cured. Shear bond
strength was tested in a universal testing machine at 30 min and after 14 days water storage and
subsequent thermocycling (1,000 x 5/55°C) (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
After 14 days water storage and thermocycling Panavia™ F and RelyX™ Unicem cement
(Aplicap™ Capsule) showed the strongest bonding to air-abraded alumina ceramic among the
cements tested.
Retention Strength of Fiber Posts Cemented with 2 Different Cements
Study design and results:
Human teeth were decoronated and roots received endodontic treatment using guttapercha. Post
spaces were prepared using the RelyX™ Fiber Post system drills (3M ESPE). RelyX Fiber Posts
were cemented using RelyX ARC (n=20) and RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap) (n=20) accord-
ing to the cement manufacturer's instructions for use. Pull-out force was determined at 30 min-
utes and at 24 hours using a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
The multi-step RelyX ARC cement and the one-step RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap) show
similar retentive strengths to RelyX Fiber Post and the tooth structure.
In Vitro Shear Bond Strength ofCementing Agents to FixedProsthodontic Restorative MaterialsPiwowarczyk A., Lauer H. C.,Sorensen J. A.; Johann WolfgangGoethe University of Frankfurt,GermanyJ Prosthet Dent. 2004 Sep; 92(3):265-73
Fig. 33: Shear bond strength of different luting cements to high-strength alumina ceramics initially and after 14 days waterstorage and thermocycling (1,000 x 5/55°C).
Retention of Fiber Posts Cementedwith a New Delivery SystemDel Mastro M., Armoush Z.,Aboushala A., Doherty E., Kugel G.Tufts University, Boston, MA, USAPublished at the IADR 2007, abstract#1553
Fig. 34: RelyX™ Fiber Post reten-tion values in human teeth 30 minand 24 hours after cementation.
[MP
a]
Fuji 1
Ketac
™ C
em
Fuji P
lus
FujiCEM
RelyX™
Lut
ing
RelyX™
ARC
Panav
ia™ F
Variol
ink® II
RelyX™
Unic
em
Aplica
p™
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Fleck’s
™ ce
men
t *
30 min14d / thermocycling
* zinc phosphate cement
[N]
0
50
100
150
200
250
RelyX™ ARC RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
30 min
24 hrs
31
Tensile Bond Strength to Fiber Post
Study design and results:
For determining the bond strength to RelyX Fiber Post the cements were applied to the post
surface in a disc shape at the conical part of the post. RelyX™ Fiber Post was either left untreat-
ed pretreated as described in the chart: etching, silanating (e. g. RelyX Ceramic Primer,
3M ESPE, or Monobond S, Ivoclar Vivadent), or a combination of silicatization (Rocatec
System, 3M ESPE) and silanating. Cements were either light cured for 40 seconds (RelyX
Unicem Aplicap and Clicker, 3M ESPE; Maxcem™, Kerr) or for 60 seconds (Multilink
Automix and Variolink® II, Ivoclar Vivadent) or self cured (1 hr at 36°C / >95% r. h.). After
water storage (24 hrs at 36°C) bond strength was measured in a pull-off test (experimental set-
up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement shows consistently same high bond strength to RelyX Fiber Post, inde-
pendent of curing mode and pretreatment steps - even without any pretreatment. Thus pretreat-
ment such as silanisation is not necessary for this system.
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
NoPretreatment
RelyX™ CeramicPrimer
Rocatec™System &
RelyX™ CeramicPrimer
PhosphoricAcid Etching
Gel
Monobond S
[MP
a]
* The manufacturer does not recommend self curing for Variolink II
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Maxcem™ (no pretreatment)
Variolink® II & Monobond S
Multilink Automix &Monobond S
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ (no pretreatment)
RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™ (no pretreatment)
SELF cure
LIGHT cure
*
3M ESPE internal lab data (Dec 2007)
Fig. 35: Tensile bond strength ofdifferent cements to RelyX™ FiberPost after light and self curingand with different post pretreat-ments.
Fig. 36: Tensile bond strength (24hrs) of RelyX™ Unicem Cement toRelyX™ Fiber Post with and with-out fiber post pretreatment.
For further information see RelyX™
Fiber Post Technical Product Profile
32
Marginal Sealing in Fiber Post Treated Teeth
Study design and results:
Extracted human anterior teeth were endodontically treated with guttapercha and a resin sealer
(AH-25, DeTrey). Post spaces were prepared using the RelyX™ Fiber Post system drills.
Cementation of the post was done according to the cement manufacturers’ Instructions for Use
using the following resin cements: RelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™) (3M ESPE), Multilink
Automix / Primer A&B (Ivoclar Vivadent), Maxcem™ (Kerr), and Calibra® / Prime & Bond®
NT™ (Dentsply). RelyX Unicem cement was applied directly into the root canal using the
RelyX Unicem Aplicap Elongation Tip (3M ESPE). All other cements were applied to the post
and/or the root canal using a lentulo spiral. After one week water storage microleakage between
the canal wall and the cement layer was determined using methylene blue dye. Additionally,
SEM pictures of the cement layer were taken.
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement in combination with RelyX Unicems Aplicap elongation tip and RelyX
Fiber Post shows a marginal sealing superior to other cement systems tested in this study.
According to the authors a good marginal seal is pivotal for the long-term success of the
endodontic and the prosthetic restoration by inhibiting bacterial infiltration.
Sealing Ability and MicroscopicAspects of a Self-adhesive ResinCement used for Fiber Post Luting intoRoot CanalsSimonetti M., Coniglio I., Magni E.,Cagidiaco M.C., Ferrari M.Dept. Dental Materials, Faculty ofDentistry, University of Siena, ItalyInternational Dentistry SA Vol. 8, No.5, Sept./Oct. 2006
Fig. 37: SEM pictures of the canalwall (top) / cement (middle) /fiber post (bottom) interface. Left:RelyX™ Fiber Post cemented withRelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™)Right: RelyX™ Fiber Post cement-ed with Multilink Automix
Fig. 38: Microleakage betweenthe cement layer and the canalwall at the apical level of the root.
0 1 2 3 4
Maxcem™
Calibra® / Prime & Bond® NT™
Multilink / Primer A&B
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
microleakage (median scores)
0: no leakage 1: < 0.5mm 2: 0.5 - 1mm 3: 1 - 2mm 4: > 2mm
dentin
RelyX Unicem cement
RelyX Fiber Post
dentin
Multilink Automix
RelyX Fiber Post
33
Marginal Adaptation of Ceramic Inlays
Study design and results:
All-ceramic inlays (IPS Empress® 2, Ivoclar Vivadent) were cemented in MOD Class 2 cavi-
ties with cervical margins located both in dentin and in enamel. Three cements were tested:
Panavia™ F 2.0 / ED Primer (Kuraray), RelyX™ Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and
the Clicker™ Dispenser (3M ESPE), and Maxcem™ (Kerr). Marginal adaptation was determined
using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after thermocycling / mechanical load-
ing (TCML 6,000 x 5/55°C, 2min each cycle; 1,200,000 x 50N).
Conclusions:
Both RelyX Unicem cement in the Aplicap capsule and the Clicker dispenser show both very
good marginal adaptation before and after thermocycling/mechanical loading.
[%]
[%]
0
20
40
60
80
100
Maxcem™ Panavia™ F2.0 RelyX™ UnicemClicker™
RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
before TCML
after TCMLTCML: thermocycling (6,000x 5/55°C) & mechanical loading (1,200,000x 50N)
Perfect Margin to Enamel
before TCML
after TCMLTCML: thermocycling (6,000x 5/55°C) & mechanical loading (1,200,000x 50N)
Perfect Margin to Dentin
0
20
40
60
80
100
Maxcem™ Panavia™ F2.0 RelyX™ UnicemClicker™
RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
Marginal Adaptation of Ceramic InlaysUsing Different CementsRosentritt M.1, Hahnel S.2, Behr M.1,Handel G.1
1University of Regensburg, Germany2University Medical CentreRegensburg, GermanyPublished at the IADR 2007, abstract#1516
Fig. 39: Marginal adaptation (% per-fect margin) of ceramic inlays to enamel before and after TCML.
Fig. 40: Marginal adaptation (% per-fect margin) of ceramic inlays todentin before and after TCML.
34
Interfacial Adaptation of Partial Ceramic Crowns
Study design and results:
Partial ceramic crown preparations were performed on 48 extracted human molars. Crowns
were fabricated using the CEREC® 3 system and Vitablocs® Mark II (Vident). Cementation
was done according to the manufacturers’ instructions for use using different luting systems:
Syntac® Classic / Variolink® II, Multilink Primer A&B / Multilink Automix (Ivoclar Vivadent)
and RelyX™ Unicem cement (Aplicap™). All cements were light cured. Thermocycling/
mechanical loading (TCML) was applied (5,000 x 5/55°C, 30s/cycle; 500,000 x 72.5N/1.6Hz).
Marginal adaptation was assessed by SEM margin analysis on replicas and by silver staining on
multiple tooth sections.
Conclusions:
Among the cements tested in this study, RelyX Unicem self-adhesive universal resin cement
showed the best interfacial adaptation, while being the least technique sensitive.
Proximal Adaptation of Partial CeramicCrowns with Different LutingTechniques/MaterialsFederlin M., Hiller K.-A., Reinhard H.,Fritzsch D., Schmalz G.University of Regensburg, GermanyPublished at the IADR PEF 2006,abstract #0562
Fig. 41: Perfect margin of partialceramic crowns before and afterthermocycling and mechanicalloading determined by SEManalysis.
[%]
0
20
40
60
80
100
Syntac® Classic &Variolink® II
Multilink Primer A,B &Multilink Automix
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
columns show median valuesbars represent 25th and 75th percentile
TCML: thermocycling (5,000x 5°C/55°C) & mechanical loading (500,000x 72.5N/1.6Hz)
Ceramic before TCMLCeramic after TCML
Dentin before TCML
Dentin after TCML
Perfect Margin to
35
pH Profile of Various Luting Cements
Study design and results:
pH values were measured using a flat-surface pH electrode at different times after mixing the
cement.
Conclusions:
RelyX™ Unicem cement shows a rapid rise in initial pH and reaches the neutral level of pH 7
which is considered to be an important prerequisite for long-term stability.
Mechanical and Physical Properties ofSelf-etching Resin Luting CementsSakalauskaite E., Tam L.E., McComb D.University of Toronto, CanadaPublished at the AADR 2006,abstract #1894
Fig. 42: pH profile ofRelyX™ Unicem ce-ment (Aplicap™) andMaxcem™ cementafter mixing.
Fig. 43: pH profiles of various luting ce-ments after mixing.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Time after mixing [hours]
Time after mixing [hours]
ph
ph
*measured with the RelyX™ Unicem capsule version
RelyX™ Unicem* LIGHT cure
RelyX™ Unicem* SELF cure
Maxcem™ LIGHT cure
Maxcem™ SELF cure
4.0 6.0 24.0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 4.0 6.0 24.0
*measured with the RelyX™ Unicem capsule version
RelyX™ Unicem LIGHT cure
RelyX™ Unicem SELF cure
Maxcem™ LIGHT cure
Maxcem™ SELF cure
Embrace™ Wetbond™ LIGHT cure
Embrace™ Wetbond™ SELF cureself-
adhe
sive
cem
ents
adhe
sive
and
conv
entio
nal c
emen
ts RelyX™ Luting Plus
Linkmax LIGHT cure
Linkmax SELF cure
Fuji Plus
RelyX™ ARC LIGHT cure
RelyX™ ARC SELF cure
*
*
36
Adhesion of Self-adhesive ResinCements to Various Core Build-upMaterialsWiedig C.A., Porsfeld V.N., Hecht R.,Raia G.3M ESPE, Germany, Seefeld, GermanyPublished at the IADR 07, abstract#2449
Fig. 45: Shear bond strength ofdifferent luting cements (lightcure) to core build-up materialsafter 24 hours and thermocycling(240 x 5/55°C).
Fig. 45: Shear bond strength ofdifferent luting cements (lightcure) to core build-up materialsafter 24 hours and thermocycling(240 x 5/55°C).
Shear Bond Strength to Core Build-Up Materials
Study design and results:
Composite buttons (Filtek™ Z250) were cemented onto core build-up discs finished with 320
grit sandpaper. Cementation was performed according to the cement manufacturers' instruc-
tions for use. After 24 hours storage and thermocycling (240 x 5/55°C) the shear bond strength
was measured in a universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
Both RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the
Clicker™ Dispenser show comparable results in both curing modes and to all materials tested.
The majority of fractures occurs in the core-build-up material.
Shear Bond Strength to CAD/CAM Glass Ceramics
Shear Bond Strength to Vitablocs® Mark II
Study design and results:
Disc shaped specimens were milled from Vitablocs® Mark II (Vident), HF-etched and silanated
(Monobond S, Ivoclar Vivadent; Silane Coupling Agent, Dentsply). The cements to be tested
(Calibra®, Dentsply; Variolink® II, Ivoclar Vivadent; RelyX Unicem Aplicap, 3M ESPE) were
applied to the prepared specimens in a cylindrical mold and light cured according to the manu-
facturers’ instructions for use. After storing in water (37°C) for 24 hours and after thermocy-
cling (10,000 x 5/55°C) the shear bond strength was determined in a universal testing machine
(experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
[MP
a] **
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Maxcem™ RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
* fractures mainly in core build-up material
Ketac™ Molar Core Paste Luxa Core Tetric Evo Ceram Filtek™ Supreme XT
[MP
a]
*
***
*
*
*
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Maxcem™ RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
* fractures mainly in core build-up material
***
Ketac™ Molar Core Paste Luxa Core Tetric Evo Ceram Filtek™ Supreme XT
Effect of Surface Treatment on theShear Bond Strength of Three ResinCements to a Machinable FeldspaticCeramic.Reich S.M.1, Wichmann M.1,Frankenberger R.2, Zajc D.2
1Department of Prosthetic Dentistry
37
Conclusions:
This study shows that RelyX™ Unicem cement performs comparable to Variolink® II. RelyX
Unicem cement bond strength to HF-etched and silanated glass ceramics even improves after
thermocycling in this study.
Shear Bond Strength to Paradigm™ C and Vitablocs® Mark II
Study design and results:
Specimens of the glass ceramic materials (Paradigm™ C, 3M ESPE; Vitablocs® Mark II, Vident)
were HF-etched and silanated (RelyX Ceramic Primer, 3M ESPE). The cements to be tested
(Variolink II, Ivoclar Vivadent; Panavia™ F2.0, Kuraray; RelyX ARC, and RelyX Unicem
Aplicap™, both 3M ESPE) were applied to the prepared specimens in a cylindrical mold and
light cured according to the manufacturers’ Instructions for Use. After storing in water (24 hrs
at 36°C) and after thermocycling (1,500 x 5/55°C) the shear bond strength was determined in a
universal testing machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
This study shows that RelyX Unicem cement achieves shear bond strength values to the tested
glass ceramic materials that are in the same range as those of adhesive cements requiring addi-
tional pretreatment steps.
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Calibra® Variolink® II RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
24 hours
TC (10,000 x 5/55°C)
[MP
a]
Vitablocs® Mark II
Paradigm™ C
0
10
20
30
40
Variolink® II Panavia™ F2.0 RelyX™ ARC RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
2Department of Operative Dentistryand Periodontology, University ofErlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen,GermanyJ Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater.2005 Aug;74(2), 740-6
Fig. 46: Shear bond strength ofthree luting cements (light cure)to Vitablocs® Mark II specimensafter 24 hours and after thermo-cycling (10,000 x 5/55°C).
Shear Bond Strength of RelyX™ Unicemand RelyX™ ARC to an ExperimentalGlass Ceramic MaterialFischer J.University of Bern, Switzerland, 2006unpublished study
Fig. 47: Shear bond strength (lightcure) to Vitablocs® Mark II andParadigm™ C specimens after 24hours and after thermocycling(1,500 x 5/55°C).
38
3M ESPE internal lab data (2007)
Fig. 48: Shear bond strength(wire-loop test) of four resincements (light cured) toParadigm™ C over time (10 min,24 hrs) and after thermocycling(5,000 x 5/55°C)
Fig. 50: Shear bond strength(wire-loop test) of four resincements (light cured) to glassceramic blocks for CAD/CAM systems after thermocycling(5,000 x 5/55°C).
Fig. 49: Shear bond strength(wire-loop test) of four resincements (light cured) to differentglass ceramic blocks for CAD/-CAM systems 24 hours aftercementation.
Shear Bond Strength After 10 min and AfterThermocycling
Study design and results:
Glass ceramic samples (Paradigm™ C, 3M ESPE; Vitablocs® Mark II, Vident; ProCAD®,
Ivoclar Vivadent) were etched with hydrofluoric acid and silanated (RelyX™ Ceramic Primer,
3M ESPE). Composite buttons (Filtek™ Z250, 3M ESPE) were cemented according to the
cement manufacturers’ instructions for use using the following luting cements: Panavia™ F 2.0
(Kuraray), Multilink Automix (Ivoclar Vivadent), RelyX Unicem in the Aplicap™ and in the
Clicker™ (3M ESPE). All cements were light cured. Shear bond strength was determined in a
universal testing machine at 10 minutes, 24 hours, and after thermocycling (5,000 x 5/55°C)
(experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
There is no significant difference in bond strength to glass ceramics for RelyX Unicem in the
Aplicap and the Clicker dispenser when measured immediately, after 24 hours or after thermo-
cycling.
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™ Panavia™ F2.0 Multilink Automix
Paradigm™ CVitablocs® Mark IIProCAD®
[MP
a]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™Panavia™ F2.0 Multilink Automix
Paradigm™ CVitablocs® Mark IIProCAD®
[MP
a]
Paradigm™ C
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Panavia™ F2.0 Multilink Automix RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™
RelyX™ UnicemClicker™
10 min24 hrsthermocycling
39
Shear Bond Strength to Metal, Composite, and CeramicRestorative Materials
Study design and results:
All restorative material samples were prepared for cementation according to the cement manu-
facturers’ Instructions for Use. Briefly, for cementation with RelyX™ Unicem cement samples
were treated as follows. Metal, strengthened core ceramic (Lava™ and alumina ceramic), and
composite samples (Paradigm™ MZ 100) were sandblasted with Rocatec™-Pre (3M ESPE) and
cleaned with ethanol. Etchable glass ceramics (Vitablocs® Mark II, Vident) were etched with
hydrofluoric acid and silanated using RelyX Ceramic Primer (3M ESPE). Rely Fiber Post were
not pretreated. Shear bond strengths of the particular cements (RelyX Unicem cement,
3M ESPE; Panavia™ F2.0, Kuraray; Maxcem™, Kerr) were determined using a universal testing
machine (experimental set-up see chapter 11.2.).
Conclusions:
RelyX Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ Capsule and the Clicker™ Dispenser show consistently
good performance in all curing modes and to a wide variety of restorative materials.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
Vitablocs® Mark II(HF etching + silanating)
Lava™
(sandblasted)Alumina ceramic
(sandblasted)Paradigm™ MZ 100
(sandblasted)RelyX™ Fiber Post
(untreated)
**
*
LIGHT / SELF cure RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
Panavia™ F 2.0 Maxcem™
• • • •
[MP
a][M
Pa]
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Gold alloyDegulor M
(sandblasted)
Titanium
(sandblasted)
Stainless steelWironit
(sandblasted)
Panavia™ F 2.0 SELF cure
Maxcem™ SELF cure
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ SELF cure
RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™ SELF cure
* 3 pretest failures with Maxcem ** cohesives failures in all tests except for Maxcem self cure • self cure not measured
3M ESPE internal lab data (2007)
Fig. 51: Shear bond strength tovarious metal restorative materi-als in the self cure mode.
Fig. 52: Shear bond strength tovarious composite and ceramicrestorative materials in the selfcure and the light cure mode.
40
12. RelyX™ Unicem Field TestingAs all new 3M ESPE products RelyX Unicem cement both in the Aplicap™ Capsule and in the
Clicker™ Dispenser were tested in dental offices before market introduction.
The RelyX Unicem Aplicap field test was carried out in 2001 and involved almost 50 dentists
from Germany and Switzerland that placed more than 800 restorations during the 8 week test
period. RelyX Unicem Clicker was tested in 2006 with almost 100 dentists in Germany,
Poland, and Italy cementing almost 2,000 restorations. In both tests the restorations placed were
fabricated from a wide variety of restorative materials and covered the complete list of indica-
tions of RelyX Unicem cement.
The reported post-operative sensitivities during the field trials were very low: approximately
0.4% for the Aplicap and 0.7% for the Clicker dispenser (see also chapter 11.1).
Although RelyX Unicem cement represented a cement class entirely new to the evaluators in
2002, RelyX Unicem cement’s features and handling characteristics largely met dentists’ needs.
The same percentage of dentists participating in the RelyX Unicem Clicker field test in 2006
intended to buy and use RelyX Unicem cement in the Clicker dispenser. This also reflects the
high level of satisfaction with RelyX Unicem cement in the new paste / paste formulation.
94
329
269
106
5
163
56 86
322
780
72
71
77
147
107
224
43CEREC®
ceramic
metall, PFMC
row
ns,
Brid
ges,
Onl
ays
Inla
ys
composite
CEREC®
ceramic
metall, PFM
composite
Posts
Other
eval
uato
rs [
%]
0
10
20
30
40
50
very satisfied satisfied undecided unsatisfied very unsatisfied
Fig. 53: Indications and restora-tive material types of restorationsplaced during the RelyX™ UnicemAplicap™ (left) and the RelyX™
Unicem Clicker™ (right) field tests.
Fig. 54: Satisfaction level of evalu-ators in the 2006 RelyX™ UnicemClicker™ field test.
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
field test 2001RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
field test 2006
41
42
13. Excerpt from the Instructions For Use
The following provides a brief overview of how to use RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive
Universal Resin Cement in the Aplicap™/Maxicap™ Capsule and in the Clicker™ Dispenser.
The state of the information presented below is as of printing this booklet.
Before working with RelyX Unicem cement, please refer to the Instructions for Use delivered
with each package of RelyX Unicem cement for the complete and most up-to-date product
information.
Indications
• Final cementing of inlays, onlays, crowns, bridges, made of all-ceramic, composite, or metal
• Final cementing of posts and screws
Pretreatment of the Cavity/Tooth Stump
• Prior to final cementation, clean the prepared stump or the cavity thoroughly with pumice
slurry, rinse with a water spray, and lightly air dry in only 2-3 intervals with air free of water
and oil, or use cotton pellets to dry it off.
• Do not overdry!
The cavity should be just dry enough that the surface has a slightly glossy appearance. As is
the case with any permanent cement, over-drying can lead to post-operative sensitivity.
• Do not use substances such as desensitizers, disinfectants, astringents, dentin sealants, rinsing
solutions containing EDTA, etc., after the final cleaning with pumice slurry and water. Their
residues may have a detrimental effect on the bonding strength and setting reaction of the
cement.
Pretreatment of the Root Canal
• Clean the root canal with a 2.5%-5.25% solution of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) as the last
step before final cementation.
• Rinse immediately with water and dry with paper points.
• We recommend the use of a rubber dam during the cementation of posts.
Pretreatment of Restorative Materials
Please refer to chapter 9 (page 11) for a brief overview.
Times
RelyX Unicem Clicker min:sec
Mixing: 00:20
Working time from start of mixing: 02:00
Light curing:
- single surface, from occlusal 00:20
- any other surface additional 00:20
Self-curing:
Polymerization start after start of mixing 02:00
Setting time after start of mixing 05:00
43
RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ / Maxicap™ Aplicap Maxicap
Mixing: min:sec min:sec
In high-frequency mixer (e.g. CapMix) 00:15 00:15
In the RotoMix rotary mixer 00:10 00:10
Working time from the start of mixing: 02:00 02:30
Light-curing:
Single surface, from occlusal 00:20 00:20
Any other surface, additional 00:20 00:20
RelyX Fiber Post posts, from occlusal 00:40 00:40
Self-curing:
Intraoral clean-up time after start of mixing 02:00 02:30
Set time after start of mixing 05:00 06:00
Removal of Excess From Restorations
• Excess cement is best removed after brief light exposure (approximately 2 sec with a conven-
tional polymerization device) or during self hardening (starting 2 min after beginning of mix-
ing in the “gel phase”) with an appro-priate instrument (e.g. scaler). Excess material of larger
volume is easier to remove!
• If the excess is removed during the self-curing, a suitable instrument must be used to hold the
restoration in position.
• Tip for removing excess composite cement: If the excess cement is re-moved with a sponge
pellet or similar implement immediately after the restoration is seated, the remaining minimal
excess cement should be light-cured briefly or covered with glycerine gel. If light-curing or
glycerine gel is not used, an oxygen inhibition layer will form on the cement surface during
polymerization; the layer is removed during polishing and can, depending on the thickness of
the layer, leave behind a deficit.
Removal of Excess From Posts
• Remove the cement with a suitable instrument or a cotton pellet.
44
14. Technique Guides14.1. RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ / Maxicap™
45
14.2. Technique Guide RelyX™ Unicem Clicker™
46
14.3. Technique Guide RelyX™ Fiber Post / RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™
47
15. Frequently Asked QuestionsQ 1. Since when has RelyX™ Unicem cement been used clinically?
The first restorations were cemented with RelyX Unicem cement (Aplicap™) in 2001. Since
then more than 25 million capsules (as of April 2007) have been sold world wide. The excellent
clinical experience reported by the users is consistent with the results of numerous in vivo stud-
ies by independent researchers that confirmed the high performance of the RelyX Unicem
cement.
Q 2. Does RelyX™ Unicem cement in the Aplicap™ / Maxicap™ and the Clicker™ have the
same chemical composition?
Yes. RelyX Unicem cement in its two delivery versions has the same chemical compositions
and exhibits the same performance. Both, the capsule and the Clicker version are based on the
identical methacrylate monomers and therefore feature the same chemical bonding and setting
reactions. Designing an easy to handle cement paste and, at the same time, a highly reactive
and long-term stable chemical system were the tasks to be met during the development of
RelyX Unicem Clicker. All chemical components from the RelyX Unicem cement capsule ver-
sion had therefore to be distributed appropriately between the base and the catalyst pastes. To
assure that RelyX Unicem cement in both delivery systems offers optimal handling the amount
of fillers and the grain particle size were adapted for each system.
Q 3.What is the expansion value for RelyX Unicem cement?
RelyX Unicem cement shows low expansion values making it safe to use for the cementation
of glass ceramic restorations and posts. This was proven in long term in vivo and in vitro stud-
ies by independent external researchers (e.g. “expansion less than or equal to 1%”: CRA
Newsletter, October 2004). These results are corroborated by the clinical experience of the den-
tal community since the introduction of the cement in 2001.
Q 4. How should indirect restorations be pretreated before cementation with
RelyX Unicem cement?
Please refer to chapter 9 (page 11) to find a short overview and to the Instructions for Use pro-
vided with each package RelyX Unicem cement for detailed information.
Q 5. How should I pretreat my CEREC® Restoration?
The materials used with CEREC are either etchable glass ceramics (e.g. Paradigm™ C,
3M ESPE; Vitablocs® Mark II, Vident; ProCAD®, Ivoclar Vivadent) or composite material (e.g.
Paradigm™ MZ100, 3M ESPE). For pretreatment recommendations see Q 4.
An important consideration for using RelyX Unicem cement for bonding CEREC restorations
is to make sure that the tooth surface is completely clean prior to placing the cement. The scan-
ning process for the CEREC system requires that a scan powder with or without a separate liq-
uid adhesive be placed on the tooth to obtain a good digital image. It is imperative that the scan
powder be completely removed from the tooth surface prior to placement of the restoration.
RelyX Unicem cement must be able to directly interact with the clean tooth surface in order to
demineralize the surface and penetrate into the tooth. Any residue from the liquid or powder
may affect the bond of the RelyX Unicem cement to the tooth. This may result in marginal
staining or failure of the restoration. A simple water spray or rinse may not completely remove
the residue. It is advisable to physically remove the powder/liquid residue from the tooth by
brushing the surface with aqueous pumice slurry followed by a thorough water rinse.
Clinical studies see page 13
Restorative material pretreatment seepage 11
Expansion value see page 9
3M ESPE application test see page 46
Study results see page 13
48
Q 6. How do I prepare the root canal before cementation of a post with RelyX™ Unicem
cement?
Remove the existing (Guttapercha) root filling and clean the root canal with a 2.5-5.25% sodi-
um hypochlorite solution (NaOCl). Rinse immediately with water and dry with paper points;
do not overdry. RelyX Unicem cement proved to bond as securely to root dentin as to crown
dentin (Walter R. et. al., IADR 2003, Gothenburg Sweden, #1463)
Q 7. How should I dry the tooth prior to cementing my restoration with RelyX Unicem
cement?
Lightly dry in only 2-3 second intervals with oil-free and anhydrous air, or use cotton gauze to
dry off excess water. Do not overdry! The tooth should be just dry enough that the surface has
a slightly glossy appearance. As is the case with any fixation cement, over drying can lead to
post-operative sensitivity.
Q 8. May I use desensitizing agents before cementing restorations with RelyX Unicem
cement?
The unique chemistry of RelyX Unicem cement demineralizes and penetrates into the tooth
surface without utilizing a separate acid etching step. This greatly reduces the potential for
patient tooth sensitivity when compared to a typical total-etch resin cement system. Therefore,
the use of an additional desensitizing step has NOT been deemed beneficial. We recommend
that cleaning the prepared tooth with an aqueous pumice slurry and water as the final treatment
before cementing the restoration with RelyX Unicem cement.
Q 9.Will fit checker materials have an affect on the bond strength of the cement?
Yes. Contamination of the tooth surface with fit checker of material could be detrimental to any
bond. If a fit checker or any oil-based product is used during try-in use, an aqueous pumice
slurry and water spray rinse is recommended to ensure a clean tooth surface prior to cementa-
tion.
Q 10. Can etching help to increase bond strength?
RelyX Unicem cement shows good bond strength to enamel and very high bond strength to
dentin without any pretreatment. If enamel is selectively etched the bond strength to enamel
can be improved to a degree. However, etching of dentin does NOT increase bond strength,
whereas it generates the risk of post-operative sensitivities and microleakage. Therefore, if
selective etching of enamel is desired, care ought to be taken not to etch adjacent dentin.
Q 11. Is RelyX Unicem cement compatible with core build-up materials?
RelyX Unicem cement provides a secure bond to all types of core build-up materials. However,
composite core build-up materials are the preferred material type with respect to its physical
properties and esthetics. Therefore, composite core build-up materials are the best match for
ceramic restorations and for RelyX Unicem cement. The surface of the core build-up material
should be roughened. Use alcohol to clean and dry.
Q 12. Is there a recommended waiting time before light curing RelyX Unicem cement?
No. In contrast to certain resin cements by other manufacturers for which some waiting time is
recommended, RelyX Unicem cement can be light-cured immediately and high bond strengths
will be achieved. The reason lies within the highly efficient and fast initiator system in combi-
nation with the unique adhesive technology.
Bond strength values see page 22
Immediate bond strength values seepage 23ff
Bond strength values see page 40
49
Q 13. Is RelyX™ Unicem cement too viscous?
RelyX Unicem cement exhibits a so-called thixotropic behavior. It flows easily under pressure
yet increases in viscosity when left undisturbed. This means that when placing a restoration
with the usual pressure, a low film thickness and an exact placement is achieved. The benefit of
higher viscosity in the absence of pressure is that RelyX Unicem cement stays put. It does not
flow away from the prepared tooth, restoration or instrument and makes excess removal easier.
Q 14.Why is RelyX Unicem cement not indicated for cementing veneers?
RelyX Unicem is a dual curing cement and, once the capsule is activated and mixed, there is a
limited amount of working time. It could be difficult for the dentist to load up multiple veneers
and seat them properly before the working time is up.
For cementing veneers, the light cure RelyX™ Veneer cement has been specifically designed,
and perfectly complements RelyX Unicem cement.
Q 15. How can occasional marginal discoloration be avoided?
1. Do not use iron-containing liquids with translucent all-ceramic crowns. A gray discoloration
may develop underneath the translucent restoration a few weeks after cementation. Do not
use ferrous liquids at the impression appointment or seating appointment.
2. After final cleaning with aqueous pumice slurry and water spray, avoid using desensitizers,
disinfectants, astringents, hydrogen peroxide, dentin sealants, and rinsing solutions contain-
ing EDTA, etc. These treatments can leave chemical residues which may have a detrimental
effect on the bond strength and setting reaction of the cement.
Hydrogen peroxide is a strong oxidizing agent that decomposes chemical initiating systems.
Hydrogen peroxide is not easily removed from the tooth surface by a water spray. Generally,
its use should be avoided with any resin cement.
3. Make sure to pretreat the restoration as described in the RelyX Unicem cement instructions
for use. For details see also Q3 and Q4.
Q 16. Are try-in pastes available for RelyX Unicem cement?
Yes, there are RelyX™ Try-In Pastes, available individually or as part of the RelyX Veneer
cement intro kit. They are designed to fit both RelyX Unicem cement and RelyX Veneer
cement shades.
50
16. Index of Technical TermsNumbers refer to pages
Adaptation to tooth structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
see also “Margin, adaptation to ~”
Adhesion, see “Bond strength”
Adhesive values, see “Bond strength”
Aging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 22
see also “Water storage”, “Thermocycling”, and “Mechanical load”
Air (-particle) -abraded, see “Sandblast”
Alpha Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 15
Alumina ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 30, 39
see also “Ceramic”
Application, ~clinical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12, 44-46
Artificial aging, see “Aging”
Bacterial penetration, see “Microleakage”
Biocompatibility, see “Pulp compatibility”
Bond strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6-8, 10, 13, 18-31, 36-39
immediate ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 22, 23, 26, 38, 48
see also “Tensile Bond Strength”, “Microtensile
bond strength”, “Retentive bond strength”
Bovine dentin, ~ enamel, ~ teeth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26, 27
Bravo Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15-16
CAD/CAM glass ceramic, see “Glass ceramic”
see also “CEREC®”
Caries, absence of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 15
Ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 10-17, 19, 22, 23, 27-30, 33, 34, 36-40, 42, 47-49
Ceramic in-/onlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 14-16, 40, 42
CEREC® . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34, 40, 47
see also “Glass ceramic”
Chemical cure mode, see “SC = self cure mode”
Clinical
~ experience (see also “Study”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40, 47
~ performance, see “Performance”
~ study, see “Study”
Composite
restorative material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 13, 14, 16, 22, 40, 42, 47, 48
test specimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 20, 23-26, 29, 30, 36, 38, 39
Compomer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Compressive strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Conditioning, ~ of tooth structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6
see also “Pretreatment”
Color match . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 15
Customer acceptance test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 40
Curing (see also “LC = light cure”, “SC = self cure”)
dual ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 8, 27, 30, 49
~ times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 42, 43
Core build-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18, 36, 48
Coronal dentin, see “Crown dentin”
Crown dentin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
Cytotoxicity, see “Pulp compatibility”
DC = dark cure, see “SC = self cure”
Debonding (see also “Pretreatment of restorative material, and of tooth structure”) . . . . . . . .16
51
Delta scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Dentin bond strength, see “Bond strength”
Desensitizing agent, desensitizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42, 48, 49
Digital scan powder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47
Dimensional stability, see “Stability”
Discoloration, marginal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14-17, 49
Ease of use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 40
Elasticity, Modulus of ~ (= E-modulus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Enamel bond strength, see “Bond strength”
Endodontic posts, see “Posts”
Etchable glass ceramic, see “Glass ceramic”
Etching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 12, 15, 39, 48
Excess removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12, 43, 44-46, 49
Expansion, ~ value, linear ~, long-term ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10, 11, 47
Fiber (reinforced) posts, see “Posts”
Fillers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-9, 47
Film thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11, 49
Fit checking products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Flexural Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 11
Fluoride ions, ~ release . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 8, 9
Glass ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 13, 29, 36-39, 47
see also “CEREC”
Glass ionomer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 7, 22, 26, 27, 29, 30
Glass fiber (reinforced) posts, see “Posts”
Gold alloy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
Guttapercha, see “Posts”
Handling test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 40
Human
~ dentin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22-25, 27
~ enamel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23-25
~ pulp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
~ teeth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18, 21-25, 27, 30, 32, 34
Hydrophilicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9, 10
Hydrolysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
see also “Stability, hydrolytic ~”
Immediate bond strength, see “Bond strength”
In vivo / In vitro Study, see “Study”
Indications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 16, 17, 40, 42, 44-46
Initiator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-9, 48, 49
Inlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 14, 15, 18, 22, 23, 33, 40, 42
Lava™, see “Zirconia ceramic”
LC = light cure (mode) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 9, 11, 12, 22-27, 29-31, 34-39, 43, 48, 49
Long-term performance, see “Performance”
Long-term stability, see “Stability”
Margin,
Adaptation to ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 15, 17, 33, 34
Discoloration of ~, staining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14, 15, 17, 47, 49
Integrity of ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15-17
Marginal adaptation, see “Margin”
Marginal discoloration, see “Margin”
Marginal sealing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Mega Pascal (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Mechanical
~ load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 33, 34
~ properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 8, 11, 14
52
Metal, ~ restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 14, 17, 19, 28, 39, 40, 42
Methacrylate monomer molecule, see “Monomer molecules”
Microleakage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 16, 32, 48
Microtensile bond strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21, 24, 25
Mixing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 9, 10, 26, 35, 42, 43
Modulus of elasticity, see “Elasticity”
Monomer molecules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-9, 47
Multi-step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 10, 14, 15, 18, 22, 23, 30
Neutral pH level, neutralization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-10, 35
Onlay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 40, 42
see also “Ceramic in-/onlay”
Performance, clinical ~, long-term ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13-18, 24, 25, 39, 47
pH profile, ~ value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-10, 35
Phosphoric acid groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-9
Polymerization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-11, 42, 43
Porcelain, “Ceramic”
Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 6, 13, 16-18, 20, 21, 30-32, 39, 40, 42, 43, 46-48
Post-operative sensitivities, ~ pain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 13, 14, 16, 42, 48
Pretest failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25, 39
Pretreatment
~ of restorative materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 42, 47
~ of root canal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
~ of tooth structure / prepared tooth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 12, 8, 42, 48
Pulp compatibility, ~ response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
see also “Post-operative sensitivities”
Pumice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42, 44, 45, 47-49
Radicals, Radical polymerization reaction, see “Polymerization”
Radiopacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 11
Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 15
Removal of excess cement, see “Excess removal”
Resin modified, resin-reinforced glass ionomer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 22, 26, 27, 29, 30, 35
Retention (bond strength) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 21, 27, 30
see also (“Bond strength”)
Rocatec-Pre, see “Sandblast”
Rocatec Plus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27
see also “Silicoating”
Root canal (posts), see “Posts”
Root (canal) filling, see “Posts”
Root dentin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
Sandblast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 22, 27, 28-30, 39
SC = self cure (mode) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11, 12, 22-29, 31, 35, 36, 39
Scan Powder, see “Digital scan powder”
Secondary caries, see “Caries”
Sensitivity, see “Post-operative sensitivities”
Setting, ~ reaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8-10, 21, 42, 47, 49
Setting times, see “Curing time”
Shades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 49
Shear bond strength, see “Bond Strength”
Silicoating (= silicating & silanating) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 28
Simulated Aging, see “Aging”
Solubility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 10, 11
Stability
dimensional ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 11
hydrolytic ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
long-term ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 10, 11, 14, 35
53
Stainless steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39
Strength
see “Bond Strength”, “Compressive ~”, “Flexural ~”,
“Microtensile Bond ~”, “Tensile Bond ~”,
Stress testing, stress simulation, see “Thermocycling”, “Mechanical load”
Study,
~ clinical, ~ in vivo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14-18, 47
~ design, experimental design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
~ in vitro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18-39
~ long-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14-39
Surface
~ roughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14-16
~ hardness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
TCML = thermocycling & mechanical loading
see “Thermocycling” and “Mechanical load”
Tensile bond strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20, 21, 23, 25-27, 31
Thermal cycling, see “Thermocycling”
Thermocycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 22, 24, 27-30, 33, 34, 36-38
Times, see “Working time”, “Curing time”, “Mixing”
Titanium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18, 39
Total etch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12, 48
see also “Multi-step”
Tribochemical surface treatment, see “Silicoating”
Try-in pastes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Veneers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 49
Viscosity, viscous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49
Water
~ sorption (see also “Hydrophilicity”, “Hydrolysis”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
~ storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 22, 24, 27-32
Wire loop test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19, 20, 38
Working time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5, 8, 42, 43, 49
Zinc phosphate cement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 22, 26, 27, 29, 30
Zirconia ceramic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13, 22, 23, 27-29, 39
TC = thermocycling
TCML = thermocycling & mechanical loading
LC = light cure
SC = self cure (= dark cure, DC)
54
17. LiteratureLiterature on RelyX™ Unicem Cement
3M™ ESPE™ RelyX™ Unicem Self-Adhesive Universal Resin Cement 4-year Clinical
Performance
THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Vol. 24, No. 4, May 2007
Adhesion of RelyX™ Unicem Aplicap™ on RelyX Fiber Post
Popp E.-M., Peez R., Porsfeld V., Lachermeier B.
3M ESPE AG, Seefeld, Germany
PEF 2006, abstract #0067
Adhesion of Self-adhesive Resin Cements to Various Core Build-up Materials
Wiedig C.A., Porsfeld V.N., Hecht R., Raia G.
3M ESPE, Germany, Seefeld, Germany
IADR 2007, abstract #2449
Adhesion of Various Adhesive Resin Cements to RelyX™ Fiber Post
Porsfeld V., Peez R., Lachermeier B.
3M ESPE AG, Seefeld, Germany
PEF 2006, abstract #0068
Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Luting Agents to Enamel / Dentin
Hikita K.1,2, De Munck J.1,2, Ishijima T.2, Maida T.2, Lambrechts P.1,2, Van Meerbeek B.1,2
1Catholic University of Leuven, Netherlands2Health Sciences University of Hokkaido, Sapporo, Japan
IADR 2004, abstract #3175
Bonding effectiveness of adhesive luting agents to enamel and dentin
Hikita K., Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J., Ikeda T., Van Landuyt K., Maida T., Lambrechts P.,
Peumans M.
Dent Mater. 2006 Jan 16
Bonding of a Novel Self-Adhesive Cement to Tooth Substrates
Trajtenberg C.P., Pinzon L.M., Powers J.M.
University of Texas Dental Branch at Houston, USA
AADR 2003, abstract #1197 revised
Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin
De Munck J., Vargas M., Van Landuyt K., Hikita K., Lambrechts P., Van Meerbeek B.
Dent Mater. 2004 Dec;20(10):963-71
Bond Strength of Self-Adhesive Cementing Agents to Dentin and Enamel
Piwowarczyk A., Bregulla J., Lauer H.-C.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
IADR 2007, abstract #1540
Ceramic Inlays Luted with a Self-Adhesive Cement After one Year
Taschner M., Frankenberger R., Petschelt A., Krämer N.
University of Erlangen, Germany
AADR 2006, abstract #1361
Clinical Outcomes of Ceramic Inlays / Onlays Luted With Two Bonding Systems.
Denehy G., Stanford C., Cobb D., Vargas M. et al.
University of Iowa, USA, 2007, unpublished study
55
Clinical Performance of a Self-adhesive Universal Resin Cement; Initial Findings
Burke J.J.T., R.J. Crisp, B. Richter
Abstract #0564, IADR meeting 2005 Baltimore
Comparison of titanium dowel retention using four different luting agents
Balbosh A., Ludwig K., Kern M.
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Sep; 94(3):227-33
CRA Status Report: Understanding Cement Use in 2004
CRA Newsletter, Volume 28, Issue 10, October 2004
Dentin Shear Bond Strength of Various Luting Cements
Piwowarczyk A.1, Lauer H.-Ch.1, Sorensen J.A.2
1Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany2Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, USA
CED 2002, abstract #0215
Effect of One-day Storage on Bonding of Self-Adhesive Resin Cements
Irie M.1, Richter B.2, Suzuki K.1
1Okayama University Graduate School, Okayama, Japan23M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany
AADR 2006 abstract #1839
Effect of Surface Treatment on the Shear Bond Strength of Three Resin Cements to a
Machinable Feldspatic Ceramic.
Reich S.M.1, Wichmann M.1, Frankenberger R.2, Zajc D.2
1Department of Prosthetic Dentistry2Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg,
Erlangen, Germany
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2005 Aug; 74(2), 740-6
Effect on thermocycling on bond strength of luting cements to zirconia ceramic
Luthy H., Loeffel O., Hammerle CH
Dent Mater. 2006 Feb; 22(2):195-200.
FRC vs. Titanium Posts - Preliminary Results of a RCT
Naumann M.1, Sterzenbach G.2, Blankenstein F.2, Lange K.-P.2
1Humboldt-University Berlin, Charite - University Medicine, Germany2Humboldt-University Berlin, Germany;
IADR 2006, abstract #0077
Human Pulp Response to Resin Cements Used to Bond Inlay Restorations
Costa C.A. de S.1, Hebling J.2, Randall R.C.2
1University Sao Paulo State-UNESP, Sao Paulo, Brasilia23M ESPE, St. Paul, USA
Journal of Dental Materials, No. 22, 2006, 954–962
Influence of different adhesive resin cements on the fracture strength of aluminum oxide
ceramic posterior crowns.
Komine F, Tomic M, Gerds T, Strub JR.
J Prosthet Dent 2004 Oct;92(4):359-64
In Vitro Bond Strength of Adhesive Cements to Tooth Structure.
Pinzon L.M., Powers J.M.
University of Texas Dental branch at Houston, USA
THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Research Report, No. 1, June 2005
56
In vitro evaluation of wall-to-wall adaptation of a self-adhesive resin cement used for
luting gold and ceramic inlays
Fabianelli A., Goracci C., Bertelli E., Monticelli F., Grandini S., Ferrari M.
J Adhes Dent. 2005 Spring;7(1):33-40.
In vitro retentive strength of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns using different luting agents
Ernst CP., Cohnen U., Stender E., Willershausen B.
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Jun;93(6):551-8.
In Vitro Retentive Strength of Zircon-Oxide all Ceramic Crowns
Ernst C.-P., Askoy E., Stender E., Willershausen B.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany
Published at the IADR PEF 2006, abstract #0248
In Vitro Shear Bond Strength of Cementing Agents to Fixed Prosthodontic Restorative
Materials
Piwowarczyk A., Lauer H. C., Sorensen J. A.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe University of Frankfurt, Germany
J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Sep; 92(3): 265-73
Long-term bond between dual-polymerizing cementing agents and human hard
dental tissue
Piwowarczyk A., Bender R., Ottl P., Lauer HC.
Dent Mater. 2006 Feb 20;
Marginal Adaptation of Ceramic Inlays Using Different Cements
Rosentritt M.1, Hahnel S.2, Behr M.1, Handel G.1
1University of Regensburg, Germany2University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany
IADR 2007, abstract #1516
Marginal adaptation in dentin of a self-adhesive universal resin cement compared
with well-tried systems
Behr M., Rosentritt M., Regnet T., Lang R., Handel G.
Dent Mater. 2004 Feb;20 (2):191-7.
Mechanical and Physical Properties of Self-etching Resin Luting Cements
Sakalauskaite E., Tam L.E., McComb D.
University of Toronto, Canada
AADR 2006, abstract #1894
Mechanical Properties of luting cements after water storage
Piwowarczyk A., H-C Lauer
Johann Wolfgang Goethe University of Frankfurt, Germany
Operative Dentistry, 2003, 28-5,535-542
Microleakage of various cementing agents for full cast crowns
Piwowarczyk A., Lauer HC., Sorensen JA
Dent Mater. 2005 May;21(5):445-53
Microtensile Bond Strength of Luting Materials to Coronal and Root Dentin
Walter Ricardo DDS, Patricia A. Miguez DDS, MS, Patricia N.R. Pereira, DDS,PhD
J Esthet Restor Dent 17:165-171, 2005
57
Micro-tensile bond strength of three luting resins to human regional dentin
Yang B., Ludwig K., Adelung R., Kern M.
Dent Mater. 2006 Jan; 22(1):45-56. Epub 2005 Jul 22
Proximal Adaptation of Partial Ceramic Crowns with Different Luting
Techniques/Materials
Federlin M., Hiller K.-A., Reinhard H., Fritzsch D., Schmalz G.
University of Regensburg, Germany
IADR PEF 2006, abstract #0562
Retention of Fiber Posts Cemented with a New Delivery System
Del Mastro M., Armoush Z., Aboushala A., Doherty E., Kugel G.
Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA
IADR 2007, abstract #1553
Retention of quartz-fibre endodontic posts with a self-adhesive dual cure resin cement
Bateman G.J., Lloyd CH, Chadwick RG, Saunders WP
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2005 Mar; 13(1):33-7
Sealing Ability and Microscopic Aspects of a Self-adhesive Resin Cement used for
Fiber Post Luting into Root Canals
Simonetti M., Coniglio I., Magni E., Cagidiaco M.C., Ferrari M.
Dept. Dental Materials, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Siena, Italy
International Dentistry SA Vol. 8, No. 5, Sept./Oct. 2006
Shear Bond Strength of RelyX™ Unicem and RelyX™ ARC to an Experimental Glass
Ceramic Material
Fischer J.
University of Bern, Switzerland, 2006, unpublished study
Shear Bond Strength of the Zirconia / Resin Interface
Behr M., Rosentritt M., Kolbeck C., Lang R., Handel G.
University of Regensburg, Germany
Published at the IADR 2007 #2627
The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: comparison between microtensile
and push-out bond strength measurements
Goracci C., Tavares AU, Fabianelli A., Monticelli F., Raffaelli O., Cardoso PC, Tay F., Ferrari M.
Eur J Oral Sci. 2004 Aug; 112(4):353-61
The Shear Bond Strength Between Luting Cements and Zirconia Ceramic after two
Pretreatments.
Piwowarczyk A., Lauer H. C., Sorensen J. A.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe University of Frankfurt, Germany
Oper Dent. 2005 May-Jun; 30(3): 382-8
Trends in Indirect Dentistry: 3. Luting Materials
Burke FJ Trevor
Restorative Dentistry, June 2005
Two-year Performance of Restorations Placed with a Self-Adhesive Luting Material
Crisp R.J., Burke F.J.T.
University of Birmingham, UK
IADR 2006, abstract #2098
58
General Literature on Dental Cements
Adhesive Cements and Cementation
White S.N.,
CDA Journal 1993, 21, 30-37
Contemporary Evaluation of Dental Cements
Donovan T.E., George C.C.,
Compendium 1999, 20, 197-219
Current status of luting agents for fixed prosthodontics
Diaz-Arnold A.M., Vargas M.A., Haselton D.R.,
J. Prosth. Dent. 1999, 81 (2), 135-141
Dental luting agents:A review of current literature
Rosenstiel S.F., Land M.F., Crispin B.J.,
J. Prosth. Dent. 1998, 80 (3), 280-301
in: Phillips’ Science of Dental Materials
Anusavice K. J.,
W.B. Saunders, 10. edition, Philadelphia, 1996
in: Ullmann’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, Dental Materials (chapter: cements)
Stefan K.,
Electronic Release, Wiley, 2000.
Mechanical properties of dental luting cements
Li Z.C., White S.N.,
J. Prosth. Dent. 1999, 81, 597-609
Trends in Indirect Dentistry: 3. Luting Materials
Burke F.J.T,
Restorative Dentistry, June 2005
59
3M ESPE Dental Products
3M Center, Building 275-2SE-03St. Paul, MN 55144-1000, USA
3M, ESPE, Aplicap, Clicker, CoJet,Filtek, Ketac, Lava, Maxicap,Paradigm, RelyX, Rocatec andScotchbond are trademarks of 3M or 3M ESPE AG.Authentic, belleGlass, Calibra,Cercon, CEREC, Dycal, EmbraceWetBond, Empress, Excite,Heliobond, Maxcem, Nexus2,Panavia, Prime & Bond NT,ProCAD, Procera, Syntac, Variolinkand Vitablocs are not trademarksof 3M or 3M ESPE AG.
© 3M 2007. All rights reserved.
XXXXXXXXXXXX/XX
3M ESPE AG · ESPE Platz82229 Seefeld · Germany E-Mail: [email protected]: www.3mespe.com