Jump to content

Luting agent

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sphenoid15 (talk | contribs) at 23:20, 17 November 2017 (added an external link for RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This photo shows the application of luting cement onto a temporary dental crown. The use of lute in this case is therefore considered provisional because of the short duration of use of the crown (up to 6 weeks). The crown will eventually be replaced by a permanent crown.

A luting agent is an application of a dental cement. Luting agents connect an underlying tooth structure to a fixed prosthesis, hence giving rise to the term, luting agent, as they lute, or glue, two different structures together. There are two major purposes of luting agents in Dentistry – to secure a cast restoration in fixed prosthodontics (e.g. for use of retaining of an inlay, crowns, or bridges), and to keep orthodontic bands and appliances in situ.

In a complex restoration procedure, the selection of a luting agent is a critical stage, as it plays a key role in the long-term success of a restoration.[1] Besides working as a retentive aid to prevent the fixed prosthesis from dislodging, it also plays the role of a seal, preventing bacteria from penetrating the tooth-restoration interface.[2]

The oldest material available is the zinc phosphate cement, which has been used in dentistry for more than 100 years. Following the introduction of adhesive resin systems to the market, there is now a wide range of dental materials available that can serve as luting agents. As such, they each have their own advantages and disadvantages, and can each be employed in different scenarios. The choice of luting agent is also dependent on clinical factors, which includes the patient’s occlusion, design of tooth preparation, if adequate moisture control is achievable, type of core material, type of supporting tooth structure, tooth location etc.[3] Much research has been carried out on the properties of each luting agent but at present, there is no single luting agent available which is ideal for use in all scenarios. 

Classification

There are many dental luting agents or lutes available in the market now. Some claimed that recently introduced agents such as resins and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) performed better clinically, due to their improved properties. In fact, both conventional and contemporary luting agents have their advantages and disadvantages.[4] Ultimately, the durability of restoration attached to the tooth surface using lutes depends on several factors, for instance strength of materials used, operator’s skills, tooth type and patient’s behaviour.[5]

Dental lutes can be classified in many ways, some of which based on:

(i) user’s knowledge and experience of use[6]

  • conventional: zinc phosphate, zinc polycarboxylate and glass-ionomer (GI)
  • contemporary: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) and resin

(ii) type of setting mechanism[7]

  • acid-base reaction: zinc phosphate, zinc polycarboxylate, glass-ionomer
  • polymerisation: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) and resin

(iii) the expected duration of use of restoration[8]

  • definitive (long term): zinc phosphate, zinc polycarboxylate, glass-ionomer, resin-modified glass-ionomers (RMGIC) and resin
  • provisional (short term): eugenol, non-eugenol, resin, or polycarboxylate based

Definitive cements

Resin cements

Resin cements are a type of polymerisable lutes. It consists of methacrylate and dimethacrylate monomers (eg. bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA), urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA), tri-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGMA)), filler particles (eg. quartz, fused silica, aluminosilicates and borosilicates) and an initiator which can be either chemically or light activated.[9] There are essentially 3 types of resin cements based on their mechanism of matrix formation.

  • Chemically/ self-cured resin cements

Autopolymerisation occurs once all the constituents are mixed together. External source of energy such as light and heat is not needed to activate the setting reaction. Excess cement should be removed immediately after seating the restoration by using interproximal dental instruments such as dental floss. Autopolymerised cement is proved to be the most radiolucent among all resin cements,[10] making it relatively difficult to be seen on radiographs.

  • This photo shows an operator using a dental curing light to initiate the setting reaction of the dental cement used.
    Light-cured resin cements[11]

Due to the presence of light-activated components (photo-initiators), this type of resin cement requires an external light source to initiate the setting reaction. This characteristic allows command set at the periphery of the restoration where light can reach the cement. However, this type of cement is not suitable for thick restorations due to attenuation of light. Instead, a chemically-cured resin cement should be used.

  • Dual-cured resin cements

It consists of a light-activated paste mixed with a chemical catalyst for resin polymerisation. It is widely used for luting dental restoration whereby the thickness allows penetration of light for partial curing only. On the other hand, the chemically-cured component is key in ensuring complete polymerisation and hence full strength acquisition.[9] Discolouration may occur due to the presence of aromatic amine.[12] Overall, the combination of its physical and chemical properties makes it the most favourable type.[13]

Today resin cements are manufactured in different shades to accommodate the demanding aesthetic needs.[14] It is also well known for its high flexural strength, which ranges from 64 to 97 MPa.[15] Although it has the advantage of attaching restorations with minimal retentive capacity to tooth surfaces due to its high bond strength to dentine, its methacrylate constituent causes it to undergo polymerisation shrinkage when setting.[9] The strain introduced by the shrinkage will tend to raise the tensile stresses significantly at areas where the cement is thick. However, the cement thickness usually used is sufficiently low to raise concern.[16] Another way to look at the strain applied onto the tooth structure is to consider the configuration factor (C-factor) of the lute, especially in the case of inlay type restoration.[9] The use of resin cements is considered technique sensitive as compared to conventional cements because it requires multiple steps for bonding and is difficult to clean up.[17]

Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC)

RMGIC, also known as hybrid cements, was developed with the purpose of eliminating weaknesses of the traditional glass-ionomer (GI) to enhance its existing properties.[18] The addition of polymerisable resins (hydrophilic methacrylate monomers) results in higher compressive and tensile strength, as well as lower solubility,[1] all of which are ideal properties of a dental luting agent. The setting reaction takes place with the relatively quick polymerisation of resins and gradual acid-base reaction of GI.[1] At the early stage of setting reaction, RMGIC has a certain degree of solubility at the margins. Therefore, it is important to keep the margin dry for around 10 minutes to minimise loss of marginal cement.[1]

Theoretically, RMGIC benefits the teeth by releasing fluoride at the marginal area to reduce the risk of tooth decay. However, there is currently no clinical evidence to prove this[9] since the cement film is very thin (only 20–30μm) at the margin.[19]

Provisional/Temporary cements

Provisional (or temporary) luting agents are used specifically for inter-appointment fixation of temporary restorations, prior to cementation of a permanent restoration [20]. It is mainly provisional crowns and bridges (fixed partial dentures) that are cemented with eugenol-containing temporary cements, but sometimes they may be used for permanent restorations [21].

As these temporary restorations will require removal, their ideal properties should consist of poor physical properties, such as low tensile strength and high solubility; as well as no pulp irritability and easy handling [22]. The main examples of temporary luting agents include zinc oxide-eugenol cements, non-eugenol containing zinc oxide cements and calcium hydroxide pastes [20].

Zinc oxide-eugenol

Eugenol (4-allyl-2-methoxy phenol) is the principal constituent of clove oil, and when mixed with zinc oxide leads to a chelating reaction. All eugenol reacts to zinc oxide eugenol, meaning none is available to diffuse once setting is complete. Supposedly its therapeutic effects are supported by dentinal tubule fluid promoting the release of eugenol and its penetration towards the pulp [23].

Zinc oxide-eugenol is often found as a two-paste material when used for temporary cementation. The paste containing zinc oxide often includes mineral or vegetable oils, and the eugenol has fillers incorporated into it to form the other paste [20]. A well-known product utilised in the two-paste form is Temp-Bond™.

Zinc oxide-eugenol may present as a powder (zinc oxide) that requires mixing with a liquid (eugenol). The zinc oxide powder may contain up to 8% of other zinc salts (acetate, propionate, or succinate) as accelerators. The liquid containing eugenol has up to 2% of acetic acid added as an accelerator [20]. A well-known product utilised in this powder-liquid form is Kalzinol™.

Zinc oxide non-eugenol

If cementation of a definitive restoration would require a resin-based luting agent, there is evidence indicating the use of a zinc oxide non-eugenol containing cement. Non-eugenol materials use long chain aliphatic acids or aryl-substituted butyric acid to react with zinc oxide particles [20]. Eugenol itself is known to be incompatible with resin polymers [21], as it is a radical scavenger (like other phenolic compounds) and therefore inhibits polymerisation of resin materials [24][25].

Further evidence illustrated that the application of eugenol-containing cement to cured composite resin cores before final cementation with resin cement significantly reduced retention of the crowns [26]. It is also worth bearing in mind that a temporary cement’s incomplete removal from a cured resin composite core may affect the final restoration’s cementation quality [26]. A well-known product used in this instance is Temp-Bond NE™.

Clinical applications

Definitive cements

Zinc phosphate

  • This image shows the different types of indirect restorations mentioned in the clinical application section. The ideal luting agent is chosen depending on the type of materials used to fabricate the restoration.
    Zinc phosphate is used to place metal constructed restorations which are mechanically retentive.[9] The material is also suitable for cementing prefabricated or cast metal post-cores.[27] It can also be used to lute long span bridges.[20]
  • The use of zinc phosphate in luting a porcelain crown may result in decreased aesthetic properties due to the high concentrations of unreacted zinc oxide, especially if the cement lute margin is visible. To avoid this, the crown margins should be kept within gingival crevice, so that the cement lute remains hidden.[21]

Zinc polycarboxylate

  • This material is mainly used in attaching crowns and inlays.[21] Due to masticatory forces causing deformation, it can only be used in short-span bridges.[20] Zinc polycarboxylate is adherent to tooth structure such as enamel and dentine, but has weak or no bond with gold and porcelain. This presents limited use when it comes to luting gold or porcelain crowns. However, zinc polycarboxylate bonds to non-precious metal alloys that have been increasingly used in porcelain fused to metal (PFM) crowns.[21]
  • Zinc polycarboxylate bonds well with stainless steel, and this makes it useful for the attachment of orthodontic bands.[21]
  • As a result of a high concentration of unreacted zinc oxide cores, zinc polycarboxylate sets opaque. If used in porcelain crowns, this will degrade the aesthetic properties of the restoration if the cement lute is left visible.[21]

Glass ionomer

  • Glass ionomer cement when combined with retentive preparations produced a high retentive strength when used as a cement for metal copings to uremic teeth.[28]
  • Glass ionomer cements can be used with metal and metal-ceramic restorations provided they possess adequate retentive and resistance form.6 They are however, contraindicated for all-ceramic restorations that are low-strength.[26]
  • It is also suitable for use in amalgam restorations, due to its ability to withstand amalgam condensation. It has been said that GI cements can give more rigid support compared to calcium hydroxide cements, making it popular as a lining material.[21]
  • Glass ionomer has an aesthetic advantage over zinc phosphate and zinc polycarboxylate when it comes to luting porcelain crowns.[21] This is because of the presence of unreacted cores of glass rather than zinc oxide, therefore making it more translucent.[21] However, improvements are still required to achieve a true match to porcelain.[21]
  • Glass ionomer has not been recommended for cementing posts, as the vibration caused by tooth preparation may decrease the retention provided by the cement.[20]
  • In orthodontics, glass ionomer cements are widely used to attach orthodontic bands. The presence of an adhesive seal between the cement and tooth structure additional to fluoride release can help to maintain teeth in good condition throughout orthodontic treatment. However, in practice, the high rate of brackets debonding during treatment has shown that glass ionomer is not a suitable material in this aspect.[21]

Resin modified glass ionomer

  • RMGIC has demonstrated a successful history when used for both metal and metal ceramic restorations[26] and high-strength ceramic restorations (alumina and zirconia cores).[29] The cement also demonstrated good results with metal and composite fibre posts.[26] However, they do not provide adequate retention when used on tooth preparations with poor retention and resistance forms.[20]
  • Due to the possibility of hygroscopic expansion, these cements are not recommended for use with all-ceramic restorations that are susceptible to etching and with posts.[30]
  • Similar to the Glass ionomer cement, RMGIC can also be used to provide a high retentive strength when used in cementation of metal copings on uremic teeth with retentive preparations.[28]

Resin

  • Resin cements are widely selected for luting non-metallic restorations, resin bonded bridges, ceramic crowns and porcelain veneers.[26] They are available in a different number of shades, viscosities and aesthetic try-in pastes. These cements are also an option for use with ceramic and resin composite inlays and onlays.[26]
  • They also demonstrated a favourable outcome when used  for all-ceramic restorations, veneers, metal or metal-ceramic restorations with compromised retention and resistance form.[31]
  • Resin cement is also shown to be useful for cementation of post in endodontically treated teeth.[31]

Self-adhesive cements

  • Self-adhesive cements do not require intermediate steps to bond tooth structure, unlike resin cements.[26] This gives simplicity and efficiency in its use. They are dual-cured and are most effective when bonded to dentine.[26] It is suitable for cementing all-ceramic crowns, porcelain inlays and onlays.[26]
  • Self-adhesive resin cements also demonstrated high and adequate survival rates when used as a cement for metal ceramic crowns making it a feasible alternative.[34][9]

Provisional cements

Zinc oxide eugenol

  • Zinc oxide eugenol is used for luting temporary restorations due to its good sealing abilities but inferior physical properties.[20]
  • Eugenol containing cements should be used with caution as the eugenol can contaminate the preparation by inhibiting the polymerization of certain resin based composites which are used as a definitive filling material.[35] They also reduce the bond strength of both total and self-etching adhesive systems to dentin if used before an indirect bonding restoration.[36]
  • Another report shows that there is no difference in bond strengths of self-adhesive resin cements to dentine between prior application of eugenol free and eugenol containing provisional cements.[37]
  • Later publications show a reduction in luting agent bond strengths to dentine when eugenol containing provisional cements are used. Nevertheless, contamination of dentine which interference with adhesion of definitive luting agent is inevitable when a provisional cement is used regardless of whether the cement contains eugenol or not.[38]

Selection of luting agent to be used for a given restoration should be based on a basic knowledge of the materials available, the type of restoration to be placed, the requirements of the patient and the expertise & experience of the clinician.

Ideal properties

References

  1. ^ a b c d Lad, Pritam P; Kamath, Maya; Tarale, Kavita; Kusugal, Preethi B. "Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review". Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH. 6 (1): 116–120. ISSN 0976-7428. PMC 3959149. PMID 24653615. Retrieved 17 Nov 2017.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  2. ^ Pameijer, Cornelis H.; Glantz, Per-Olof; Fraunhofer, Anthony von (2012). "Clinical and Technical Considerations of Luting Agents for Fixed Prosthodontics". International Journal of Dentistry. 2012: 1–2. doi:10.1155/2012/565303. ISSN 1687-8728.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  3. ^ Özcan, Mutlu. Luting cements for dental applications. pp. 375–394. doi:10.1533/9780857096432.3.375.
  4. ^ Lad, Pritam P; Kamath, Maya; Tarale, Kavita; Kusugal, Preethi B. "Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review". Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH. 6 (1): 116–120. ISSN 0976-7428. PMC 3959149. PMID 24653615.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  5. ^ Demarco, Flávio F.; Corrêa, Marcos B.; Cenci, Maximiliano S.; Moraes, Rafael R.; Opdam, Niek J. M. (January 2012). "Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials". Dental Materials: Official Publication of the Academy of Dental Materials. 28 (1): 87–101. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003. ISSN 1879-0097. PMID 22192253.
  6. ^ Donovan, T. E.; Cho, G. C. (March 1999). "Contemporary evaluation of dental cements". Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry (Jamesburg, N.J.: 1995). 20 (3): 197–199, 202–208, 210 passim, quiz 220. ISSN 1548-8578. PMID 11692331.
  7. ^ AD Wilson, JW Nicholson. Acid-base cements, their biomedical and industrial applications. New York:Cambridge University Press. 1993:1–383.
  8. ^ Pameijer, Cornelis H. (2012). "A Review of Luting Agents". International Journal of Dentistry. 2012: 1–7. doi:10.1155/2012/752861. ISSN 1687-8728.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  9. ^ a b c d e f g Williams, G. (2009-04-25). "Applied dental materials, 9th edition". BDJ. 206 (8): 441–441. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.321. ISSN 1476-5373. Cite error: The named reference ":5" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  10. ^ Attar, Nuray; Tam, Laura E.; McComb, Dorothy. "Mechanical and physical properties of contemporary dental luting agents". The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 89 (2): 127–134. doi:10.1067/mpr.2003.20.
  11. ^ Lad, Pritam P; Kamath, Maya; Tarale, Kavita; Kusugal, Preethi B. "Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review". Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH. 6 (1): 116–120. ISSN 0976-7428. PMC 3959149. PMID 24653615.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  12. ^ GJ Christensen. Reducing the confusion about resin cements. Clin Rep. 2008;1:1–3. 
  13. ^ Attar, Nuray; Tam, Laura E.; McComb, Dorothy. "Mechanical and physical properties of contemporary dental luting agents". The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 89 (2): 127–134. doi:10.1067/mpr.2003.20.
  14. ^ Lad, Pritam P; Kamath, Maya; Tarale, Kavita; Kusugal, Preethi B. "Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review". Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH. 6 (1): 116–120. ISSN 0976-7428. PMC 3959149. PMID 24653615.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  15. ^ Attar, Nuray; Tam, Laura E.; McComb, Dorothy. "Mechanical and physical properties of contemporary dental luting agents". The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 89 (2): 127–134. doi:10.1067/mpr.2003.20.
  16. ^ May, Liliana G.; Kelly, J. Robert (October 2013). "Influence of resin cement polymerization shrinkage on stresses in porcelain crowns". Dental Materials: Official Publication of the Academy of Dental Materials. 29 (10): 1073–1079. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2013.07.018. ISSN 1879-0097. PMID 23973087.
  17. ^ Lad, Pritam P; Kamath, Maya; Tarale, Kavita; Kusugal, Preethi B. "Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review". Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH. 6 (1): 116–120. ISSN 0976-7428. PMC 3959149. PMID 24653615.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  18. ^ Michelle,, Sunico-Segarra,. A practical clinical guide to resin cements. Segarra, Armin,. Berlin. ISBN 3662438429. OCLC 894046576.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  19. ^ "A Practical Guide To The Use Of Luting Cements" (PDF). {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)
  20. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Craig's restorative dental materials. Sakaguchi, Ronald L., Powers, John M., 1946- (13th ed ed.). St. Louis, Mo.: Elsevier/Mosby. 2012. ISBN 9780323081085. OCLC 757994720. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: others (link) Cite error: The named reference ":1" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  21. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Bayindir, Funda; Akyil, M. Samil; Bayindir, Yusuf Ziya (December 2003). "Effect of eugenol and non-eugenol containing temporary cement on permanent cement retention and microhardness of cured composite resin". Dental Materials Journal. 22 (4): 592–599. ISSN 0287-4547. PMID 15005235. Cite error: The named reference ":2" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  22. ^ Wiesmann, U. N.; DiDonato, S.; Herschkowitz, N. N. (1975-10-27). "Effect of chloroquine on cultured fibroblasts: release of lysosomal hydrolases and inhibition of their uptake". Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 66 (4): 1338–1343. ISSN 1090-2104. PMID 4.
  23. ^ Ganss, C.; Jung, M. (March 1998). "Effect of eugenol-containing temporary cements on bond strength of composite to dentin". Operative Dentistry. 23 (2): 55–62. ISSN 0361-7734. PMID 9573789.
  24. ^ Taira, J.; Ikemoto, T.; Yoneya, T.; Hagi, A.; Murakami, A.; Makino, K. (1992). "Essential oil phenyl propanoids. Useful as .OH scavengers?". Free Radical Research Communications. 16 (3): 197–204. ISSN 8755-0199. PMID 1318253.
  25. ^ Marshall, S. J.; Marshall, G. W.; Harcourt, J. K. (October 1982). "The influence of various cavity bases on the micro-hardness of composites". Australian Dental Journal. 27 (5): 291–295. ISSN 0045-0421. PMID 6962692.
  26. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Millstein, P. L.; Nathanson, D. (June 1992). "Effects of temporary cementation on permanent cement retention to composite resin cores". The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 67 (6): 856–859. ISSN 0022-3913. PMID 1403878. Cite error: The named reference ":3" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  27. ^ Habib, Barry; von Fraunhofer, Joseph Anthony; Driscoll, Carl F. (September 2005). "Comparison of two luting agents used for the retention of cast dowel and cores". Journal of Prosthodontics: Official Journal of the American College of Prosthodontists. 14 (3): 164–169. doi:10.1111/j.1532-849X.2005.00349.x. ISSN 1059-941X. PMID 16336233.
  28. ^ a b Ghazy, M. H.; Aboumadina, M. M.; Mahmoud, S. H. (May 2014). "Retentiveness of metal coping luted to teeth of uremic patients undergoing hemodialysis using five different luting cements". Operative Dentistry. 39 (3): E101–108. doi:10.2341/12-523-LR2. ISSN 1559-2863. PMID 24191870.
  29. ^ Leevailoj, C.; Platt, J. A.; Cochran, M. A.; Moore, B. K. (December 1998). "In vitro study of fracture incidence and compressive fracture load of all-ceramic crowns cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer and other luting agents". The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 80 (6): 699–707. ISSN 0022-3913. PMID 9830076.
  30. ^ J., Mount, Graham (2003). An atlas of glass-ionomer cements : a clinician's guide (3rd ed ed.). London: Martin Dunitz. ISBN 1841840696. OCLC 53373473. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  31. ^ a b Pegoraro, Thiago A.; da Silva, Nelson R. F. A.; Carvalho, Ricardo M. (April 2007). "Cements for use in esthetic dentistry". Dental Clinics of North America. 51 (2): 453–471, x. doi:10.1016/j.cden.2007.02.003. ISSN 0011-8532. PMID 17532922.
  32. ^ Swift, Jr., Edward J. (2012-08-01). "Self-Adhesive Resin Cements—Part II". Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 24 (4): 287–291. doi:10.1111/j.1708-8240.2012.00524.x. ISSN 1708-8240.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  33. ^ Peumans, Marleen; De Munck, Jan; Van Landuyt, Kirsten; Poitevin, Andre; Lambrechts, Paul; Van Meerbeek, Bart (April 2010). "Two-year clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive luting agent for ceramic inlays". The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 12 (2): 151–161. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a17547. ISSN 1461-5185. PMID 20157666.
  34. ^ Brondani, Lucas Pradebon; Pereira-Cenci, Tatiana; Wandsher, Vinicius Felipe; Pereira, Gabriel Kalil; Valandro, Luis Felipe; Bergoli, César Dalmolin. "Longevity of metal-ceramic crowns cemented with self-adhesive resin cement: a prospective clinical study". Brazilian Oral Research. 31: e22. doi:10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2017.vol31.0022. ISSN 1807-3107. PMID 28403329.
  35. ^ Hotz, P.; Schlatter, D.; Lussi, A. (1992). "[The modification of the polymerization of composite materials by eugenol-containing temporary fillings]". Schweizer Monatsschrift Fur Zahnmedizin = Revue Mensuelle Suisse D'odonto-Stomatologie = Rivista Mensile Svizzera Di Odontologia E Stomatologia. 102 (12): 1461–1466. ISSN 0256-2855. PMID 1475669.
  36. ^ Ribeiro, José C. V.; Coelho, Paulo G.; Janal, Malvin N.; Silva, Nelson R. F. A.; Monteiro, André J.; Fernandes, Carlos A. O. (March 2011). "The influence of temporary cements on dental adhesive systems for luting cementation". Journal of Dentistry. 39 (3): 255–262. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2011.01.004. ISSN 1879-176X. PMID 21241765.
  37. ^ Bagis, Bora; Bagis, Yildirim H.; Hasanreisoğlu, Ufuk (December 2011). "Bonding effectiveness of a self-adhesive resin-based luting cement to dentin after provisional cement contamination". The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 13 (6): 543–550. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a19811. ISSN 1461-5185. PMID 21246076.
  38. ^ Pameijer, Cornelis H. (2012). "A Review of Luting Agents". International Journal of Dentistry. 2012. doi:10.1155/2012/752861. ISSN 1687-8728. PMC 3296365. PMID 22505909.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luting_agent&oldid=810865793"