{"id":6845,"date":"2017-01-20T02:18:26","date_gmt":"2017-01-20T02:18:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/sdi\/www\/it-it\/research-abstracts\/research-abstracts-set-research\/"},"modified":"2017-06-08T07:23:05","modified_gmt":"2017-06-08T07:23:05","slug":"research-abstracts-set-research","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.sdi.com.au\/it-it\/downloads\/research-abstracts\/research-abstracts-set-research\/","title":{"rendered":"Research abstracts – seT research"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_row_inner el_class=”no-padding” el_id=”top”][vc_column_inner width=”2\/3″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

seT research<\/h1>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height=”15px” el_class=”emty_basic”][vc_column_text]seT –\u00a0a self etching, self adhesive resin luting cement<\/strong><\/p>\n

Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Al-Naimi O, Lopes M B, Fujita M & McCabe J F; Fluoride Release of seT Self-Etch\/Self-Adhesive Resin Cement with that of Other Competitor Products; University of Newcastle, 2005.<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. seT; THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Vol. 25, No. 8,\u00a0Oct 2008.<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Perry R, Carey J, Defuria C, Orfanidis J, Stark P; Bonded and Self-Adhesive Cements’ Bond Strength between Zirconia-Crowns and Dentin; Tuft University, USA, Abstract # 0970, Toronto IADR 2008.<\/a><\/li>\n
  4. Papadogiannis D., Kakabura A., Chakmakchi M., Eliades G.; Conversion and acid-base reaction in self-etch resin cements;\u00a0Athens University, Abstract I.D. #346, IADR\/CED, Munich, 2009.<\/a><\/li>\n
  5. seT 18 month Clinical Performance;\u00a0THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Vol 27,\u00a0No. 7, Sept 2010.<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/3″][vc_empty_space height=”100px” el_class=”emty_basic”][vc_single_image image=”9755″ img_size=”full”][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row el_id=”p1″][vc_column][vc_column_text]Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Al-Naimi O, Lopes M B, Fujita M & McCabe J F; Fluoride Release of seT Self-Etch\/Self-Adhesive Resin Cement with that of Other Competitor Products; University of Newcastle, 2005.<\/p>\n

    Purpose: to measure the fluoride release of three self-etch\/self-adhesive resin cements: seT (SDI Ltd. Australia); Rely X Unicem Aplicap (3M\/Espe Germany); and Maxcem (Kerr Corp., USA).<\/p>\n

    Results: cumulative fluoride release[\/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text][\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Throughout the study the fluoride release was significantly the highest from seT cement and significantly the lowest from Rely X Unicem cement.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]Request Full Copy<\/a>[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

    go to top<\/a><\/p>\n

    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row el_id=”p2″][vc_column][vc_column_text]Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    seT, THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Volume 25, No.8, Oct. 2008.<\/p>\n

    seT is a self-etching, self-adhesive, fluoride relasing, dual-cured resin cement that was evaluated by The Dental Advisor’s consultants and received a 96% clinical rating!<\/p>\n

    Many consultants rated the flow of the cement to be very good, had a nice viscosity and great adaptation to walls and posts. They found the mixed cement easy to use and cleans up nicely \u2013 a five plus rating![\/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]Request Full Copy<\/a>[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

    go to top<\/a><\/p>\n

    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row el_id=”p3″][vc_column][vc_column_text]Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Perry R, Carey J, Defuria C, Orfanidis. Stark P; Bonded and Self-Adhesive Cements’ Bond Strength between Zirconia-Crowns and Dentin; Tufts University, USA, Abstract #0970, Toronto IADR 2008.<\/p>\n

    Objective: To examine the retention strengths of two different cement types\u2014Bonded Resin Cements and Self-Adhesive Resin Cements\u2014 between zirconia crowns and dentin in vitro. The following groups were tested:<\/p>\n

    Group 1: Self-Etch\/Self-Adhesive Resin-Cement: Set (SDI)
    \nGroup 2: Self-Etch\/Self-Adhesive-Resin-Cement: Maxcem (Kerr)
    \nGroup 3: Self-Adhesive-Resin-Cement: Rely-X Unicem Clicker (3M ESPE)<\/p>\n

    Methods: Fifty-one extracted human molars were prepped for all-ceramic crowns. The crowns were cemented according to manufacturers’ directions for each of the three cement groups (N=17). Cemented teeth were stored in distilled water for 3 days at 37\u00b0C and then thermocycled for 300 cycles between 5\u00b0C and 55\u00b0C with a dwell of 30 seconds. Instron machine with crosshead speed of 5mm\/min was used to pull the crowns until failure.<\/p>\n

    Results: The strength data was compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The p-value of 0.086 suggests that there is no statistically significant difference among the 3 groups. The average bond strengths were Group 3=316.8N, Group 1=284.4N, and Group 2 =208.7N.[\/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]Request Full Copy<\/a>[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

    go to top<\/a><\/p>\n

    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row el_id=”p4″][vc_column][vc_column_text]Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Papadogiannis D., Kakaboura A., Chakmakchi M., Eliades G.; Conversion and acid-base reaction in self-etch resin cements; Athens University, Abstract I.D. #346, Munich IADR\/CED, 2009.
    \nIntroduction: Self-etch, self-adhesive resin cements have benn recently introduced to facilitate the luting process and reduce chair-time. These materials set with a dual mechanism (Free radical polymerization and an acid-base reaction). The aim of the present study was to investigate the C=C conversion and acid-base reaction in self-etch resin cements.<\/p>\n

    Methods: Seven commercial products were tested (Table 1). The setting reaction was studied by ATR-FTIR spectroscopy. An ATR accessory was placed in the sample compartment of an FTIR spetrometer. Spectra of non-exposed (NE) and exposed (E) specimens (standard mode, 750mW\/cm2), dark storage at 37 degrees in all cases) were taken before setting, at setting time (NE) or after 20s light-exposure (E) and the at 10 min, 30 min, 1h and 72h for both setting modes. The extent of C=C conversion was assessed by measuring the amount of remaining C=C bonds (%RDB) employing the two-band technique. For the acid-base reaction the salt yield was evalauted after spectra normalization (C=O peak, 1720\/cm). ANOVA was used to assess the statistically significantly differences (alpha = 0.05).<\/p>\n

    Table 1 :<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
    BisCem (BC)<\/td>\nClearfil SA Cement (CS)<\/td>\nG-Cem (GC) GC<\/td>\nMaxCem Elite (MX)<\/td>\nRely-X Unicem<\/td>\nSmartCem2 (SC)<\/td>\nseT (ST)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Bisco<\/td>\nKurrary, JPN<\/td>\nJPN<\/td>\nKerr, USA<\/td>\n3M ESPE, USA<\/td>\nDentsply\/Caulk<\/td>\nSDI, AUS<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Results:<\/p>\n

    The %RDB was found significantly lower in exposed specimens for all materials tested. In all specimens %RDB was found to decrease with time. In the group of exposed specimens ST demonstrated teh lowest %RDB and SC had the highest, whereas in the non-exposed group, BC showed the highest and GC the lowest %RDB. Higher salt yield was observed in non-exposed specimens than the irridiated ones. In most non-exposed specimens the highest salt yield was observed at 72h, although the rate of the acid-base reaction showed great variations. The highest salt yield was observed in material BC. In irridiated specimens RX and GC showed a rapid build-up of the salt yield, within 10 min after irridiation. In BC, CS, MX, ST\u00a0 and SE there was an increasing salt yield up to 72h.[\/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]Request Full Copy<\/a>[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1\/2″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

    go to top<\/a><\/p>\n

    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column_inner][\/vc_row_inner][vc_separator][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row el_id=”p5″][vc_column][vc_column_text]Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n

    seT 18 month Clinical Peformance, THE DENTAL ADVISOR, Volume 27, No.7, Sept. 2010.<\/p>\n

    A total of 314 restorations were cemented over a 20-month period using seT. All of the restorations were all-ceramic restorations with the exception of one PFM crown. Of the 314 restorations, there were nine inlays\/onlays, 47 anterior crowns and 258 posterior crowns. One hundred and ninety-eight restorations were recalled – 176 at 18 months and 22 at 12 months.<\/p>\n

    Results:<\/p>\n