Table 1.
General characteristics and specific results of the included studies.
| Author, Year and Country | Study Design | Sample Size | Abutment Type | Specimen Fabrication Technique |
Type of FDP (Single Crown, 3 Unit FPD) and Fabrication Technique |
Control | Intervention | Name of DA (Manufacturer) | Main Chemical Composition |
Type of Cement, Trade Name and Manufacturer | Test and Machine Used | Mean TBS (N)/ Retentive Strength (MPa) |
Primary Outcomes |
Secondary Outcomes | Authors’ Suggestions/Conclusions/ Inferences |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mausner et al., 1996, USA [41] | In vitro | n = 96 (16 per group) | Human Third molars | Finish line: rounded shoulder/bevel Axial height: 5 mm Taper: 6–10° Spacer: 3 coats Ageing: No |
Full metal silver–palladium alloy copings (Ceradela 2, Metalor, Neuchatel, Switzerland) Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Imperva bonding agent (IBA) (Shofu Dental Corp., Menlo Park, CA, USA) (B) All-Bond (AB) desensitizing agent (Bisco Inc., Itasca, IL, USA) |
(A) HEMA & UDMA & TEGMA (B) NTG-GMA & BPDM |
(i) ZPC (Flecks Mizzy, Mizzy, Inc., Cherry Hill, NJ, USA) (ii) PCC (Duralon, Espe-Premier, Norristown, PA, USA), (iii) GIC (Ketec Cem Maxicaps, Espe-Premier, St. Paul, MN, USA), (iv) RC (NM) |
Retention values, UTM | Retention values (N) (A) ZPC: 383.28 ± 62.17 (B) ZPC + IBA DA: 354.89 ± 84.06 (C) ZPC + AB DA: 187.48 ± 50.18 (D) PCC: 335.97 ± 54.29 (E) PCC + IBA DA: 388.26 ± 34.53 (F) PCC + AB DA: 42.85 ± 14.24 (G) GIC: 234.74 ± 64.70 (H) GIC+ IBA DA: 135.73 ± 41.39 (I) GIC + AB DA: 211.37 ± 39.43 (J) RC: 289.25 ± 116.10 (K) RC + IBA DA: 485.05 ± 117.21 (L) RC + AB DA: 406.06 ± 132.61 |
Retention values: RC + IBA DA > RC + AB DA > PCC + IBA DA > ZPC > ZPC + IBA DA > PCC > RC > GIC > GIC + AB DA > ZPC + AB DA > GIC+ IBA DA > PCC + AB DA |
Retention values: ZPC > PCC > RC > GIC |
In general, application of DA reduced the retention in most of the tested specimens when cemented with ZPC, PCC or GIC, whereas retention increased when RC was used. |
| Swift et al., 1997, USA [36] | In vitro | n = 30 (10 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: NM Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 2.4° per wall Spacer: NM Ageing: No |
Full metal silver–palladium copings (Ney-Oro 76, Ney Dental International) Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) One step (Bisco Dental Products, Schaumburg, IL, USA) (B) Gluma (Heraeus Kulzer, South Bend, IN, USA) |
(A) phosphoric acid with Benzalkonium Chloride (B) glutaraldehyde and HEMA |
(i) ZPC (Hy-Bond, Shofu Inc., Koyoto, Japan) (ii) GIC ((Fuji I, GC America Inc., Alsip, IL, USA) (iii) RMGIC (Vitremer Luting Cement, 3M Dental Products Division, St. Paul, MN, USA) |
Mean force for removing crown, UTM | Mean force for removing crown (N) (A) ZPC: 587 ± 400 (B) ZPC + One step DA: 479 ± 215 (C) ZPC + Gluma DA: 449 ± 277 (D) GIC: 788 ± 401 (E) GIC + One Step DA: 872 ± 342 (F) GIC + Gluma DA: 653 ± 234 (G) RMGIC: 685 ± 156 (H) RMGIC + One Step DA: 713 ± 191 (I) RMGIC + Gluma DA: 748 ± 306 |
Mean force for removing crown GIC + One Step DA > GIC > RMGIC + RMGIC + Gluma DA + One Step DA > RMGIC > GIC + Gluma DA > ZPC > ZPC + One step DA > ZPC + Gluma DA |
Retention GIC > RMGIC > ZPC |
Use of DA does not affect the retentive properties of the three tested luting cements. |
| Johnson et al., 1998, USA [34] | In vitro | n = 60 (10 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 3 coats Ageing: No |
Full base metal alloy copings (Olympia porcelain metal alloy, Jelenko Dental Products, Armonk, NY, USA) Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | Gluma Desensitizer sealer (Heraeus/Kulzer, Dental Products Division, South Bend, IN, USA) | 5% glutaraldehyde + HEMA | (i) ZPC (Fleck’s, Mizzy Inc., Cherry Hill, NJ, USA) (ii) GIC (Ketac-Cem Maxicap, ESPE Gmbh, Seefeld, Germany) (iii) Modified RC (Resinomer, Bisco, Inc., Schaumburg, IL, USA) |
Failure stress, UTM | Failure stress (MPa) (A) ZPC: 6.3 (B) ZPC + Gluma DA: 6.4 (C) GIC:9.1 (D) GIC + Gluma DA:10.1 (E) Modified RC: 12.1 (F) Modified RC + Gluma DA: 12.6 |
Failure stress: RC + DA > RC > GIC + DA > GIC > ZPC + DA > ZPC |
RC > GIC > ZPC | Application of Gluma DA for desensitizing treatment does not affect retention of crowns cemented with the tested luting agents. |
| Yim et al., 2000, Georgia [37] | In vitro | n = 144 (12 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 26° Spacer: 2 coats Ageing: No |
Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) PD (All-Bond 2, BISCO Dental Products, Schaumburg, IL, USA) (B) NPD (Gluma Desensitizer, Heraeus Kulzer, South Bend, IN, USA) |
(A) Photopolymerizable, resin-based DA (B) Nonpolymerizing, protein-precipitating, resin-based DA |
(i) ZPC (Fleck’s Cement, Mizzy Inc., Cherry Hill, NJ, USA) (ii) GIC (Ketac Cem, ESPE GmbH, Seefeld, Germany) (iii) RMGIC (Fuji Plus, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) (iv) RC (Panavia 21, J. Morita, Tustin, CA, USA) |
Debond Stress; UTM | Debond Stress (MPa): (A) ZPC + PD DA: 0.67 ± 0.14 (B) ZPC + NPD DA: 0.81 ± 0.11 C) ZPC: 1.68 ± 0.08 (D) GIC + PD DA: 2.23 ± 0.20 (E) GIC + NPD DA: 1.98 ± 0.23 F) GIC: 2.36 ± 0.20 (G) RMGIC + PD DA: 3.46 ± 0.26 (H) RMGIC + NPD DA: 2.81 ± 0.15 (I) RMGIC: 2.96 ± 0.18 (J) RC + PD DA: 5.68 ± 0.70 (K) RC + NPD DA: 4.12 ± 0.37 (L) RC: 4.67 ± 0.48 |
Debond Stress RC + PD DA > RC > RC + NPD DA > RMGIC + PD DA > RMGIC > RMGIC + NPD DA > GIC + PD DA > GIC > GIC + NPD DA > ZPC > ZPC + NPD DA > ZPC + PD DA |
Debond Stress RC > RMGIC > GIC > ZPC |
Application of NPD DA significantly decreased the retention strength when RC, GIC and ZPC were used. Application of PD DA significantly increased retention strength when RC and RMGIC was used. DA when used with ZPC significantly decreased retention strength. |
| Wolfart et al., 2003, Germany [12] | In vitro | n = 80 (10 per group) | Human premolars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 11° Spacer: yes Ageing: 3 days and 150 days (37,500 cycles) |
Full metal nickel chromium alloy (Wiron 99, Bego, Germany) copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
Calcium Hydroxide DA applied |
Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Gluma (Heraeus Kulzer) (B) Prompt L-Pop (3M-Espe, Seefeld, Germany) (C) Optibond FL (Kerr, Orange County, CA, USA) (D) Calcium hydroxide suspension (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) |
(A) 5% Glutaraldehyde and HEMA (B) Low filled resin sealer (C) Highly filled resin sealer |
GIC (Ketac-Cem Maxicup,3M-Espe, Seefield, Germany) |
Failure Stress, UTM | Failure Stress (MPa) After 3 days aging: ## (A) GIC + Calcium hydroxide:6.92 (B) GIC + Gluma: 6.20 (C) GIC + Prompt L-Pop: 6.62 (D) GIC + Optibond: 4.91 After 150 days aging: ## (A) GIC + Calcium hydroxide: 6.02 (B) GIC + Gluma: 5.60 (C) GIC + Prompt L-Pop: 6.9 (D) GIC + Optibond:5.01 |
Failure stress After 3 days ageing: GIC + Calcium hydroxide > GIC + Prompt L-Pop > GIC + Gluma > GIC + Optibond After 150 days ageing: GIC + Prompt L-Pop > GIC + Calcium hydroxide > GIC + Gluma > GIC + Optibond |
- | Gluma and Prompt L-Pop DA does not affect the retention of crowns cemented with GIC when compared to calcium hydroxide application. |
| Johnson et al., 2004; USA [42] | In vitro | n = 55 (11 per group) | Human molars | Finish line:—NA Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 1 layer Ageing: 2500 cycles |
Full ceramometal high noble alloy (Olympia) copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) One step (Bisco Dental Products, Schaumburg, IL, USA) | Phosphoric acid with Benzalkonium Chloride | (A) ZPC (Fleck’s, Keystone Industries GmbH, Singen, Germany), (B) GIC (Ketac-Cem, ESPE Gmbh, Seefeld, Germany) (C) Modified-RC (Resinomer, Schaum-burg, IL, USA) |
Dislodgment stresses, UTM | Mean dislodgment stress (MPa) (A) ZPC: 3.7 ±1.0 (B) ZPC + One step DA:2.2 ± 0.8 (C) GIC: 2.7 ± 1.2 (D) GIC + One step DA: 4.2 ± 0.9 (E) Modified-RC: 6.4 ± 1.7 |
Mean dislodgment stress Modified RC > GIC + One step > ZPC > GIC > ZPC + One step |
dislodgment stress: Modified RC > ZPC > GIC | Resin sealers reduced retention when used with ZPC and increased retention when used with GIC. |
| Sipahi et al., 2007, Turkey [38] | In vitro | n = 50 (10 per group) | Human molars | - | Full metal base metal alloy copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Laser group (LAS), (B) sodium fluoride group (C) Oxagel oxalate group (D) Gluma primer group |
- | GIC | TS, UTM | TS (N) (A) GIC: 261 (B) GIC + Laser DA: 223 (C) GIC + sodium fluoride DA: 208 (D) GIC + Oxagel DA: 147 (E) GIC + Gluma DA: 161 |
Ts: GIC > GIC + Laser > GIC + sodium fluoride > GIC + Gluma > GIC + Oxagel |
- | Lee negative effect of laser treatment on retention for crowns cemented with GIC, as compared to other DA. |
| Jalandar et al., 2012, India [18] | In vitro | n = 90 (10 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 6° Spacer: 35–40 µ Ageing: No |
Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) GC Tooth Mousse (GC International, Itabashiku, Tokyo, Japan) (B) GLUMA desensitizer (Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany). |
(A) CPP-ACP-based (B) GLU-based |
(i) ZPC (Harvard cement Quick setting, Harvard Dental International GmbH, Hoppegarten, Germany) (ii) GIC (GC Fuji 1Tokyo, Japan) (iii) RMGIC (RelyXTM Luting, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) |
TBS; UTM | TBS (kg) (A) ZPC + TM DA: 25.27 ± 4.60 (B) ZPC + GLUMA DA: 27.92 ± 3.20 (C) ZPC:27.69 ± 3.39 (D) GIC + TM DA: 40.32 ± 3.89 (E) GIC + GLUMA DA: 41.14 ± 2.42 (F) GIC: 39.09 ± 2.80 (G) RMGIC + TM DA: 48.34 ± 2.94 (H) RMGIC + GLUMA DA: 49.02 ± 3.32 (I) RMGIC: 48.61 ± 3.54 |
TBS: RMGIC + GLUMA DA > RMGIC > RMGIC + TM DA > GIC + GLUMA DA > GIC + TM DA > GIC > ZPC + GLUMA DA > ZPC > ZPC + TM DA |
TBS: RMGIC > GIC > ZPC | GLUMA DA improves retention of cast crowns with ZPC, GIC, RMGIC. Tooth Mousse DA improves retention of cast crowns with GIC, RMGIC and reduces retention for ZPC. |
| Stawarczyk et al., 2012, Switzerland [19] | In vitro | n = 144 (12 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: Shoulder Axial height: 3 mm Taper: 10° Spacer: 35–40 µ Ageing: half specimens were aged—chewing machine, 6000 cycles |
Zirconia crowns Fabrication technique: CAD/CAM milled |
No DA | Application of DA before final cementation | Gluma Desensitizer (Haereus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) | HEMA, glutaraldehyde | (i) Panavia 21 (Kuraray Dental Co. Ltd., Osaka, Japan) (ii) RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) (iii) G-Cem (GC, Leuven, Belgium) |
TS; UTM | Tensile strength (MPa) Initial (A) Panavia 21 + Gluma DA: 2.6 ± 1.4 (B) Panavia 21: 14.1 ± 3.5 (C) RelyX Unicem + Gluma DA: 13.1 ± 2.9 (D) RelyX Unicem: 12.8 ± 2.9 (E) G-Cem + Gluma DA: 13.7 ± 4.2 (F) G-Cem: 10.7 ± 2.9 After Ageing (A) Panavia 21 + Gluma DA: 0.9 ± 0.6 (B) Panavia 21: 7.3 ± 1.7 (C) RelyX Unicem + Gluma DA: 12.8 ± 4.3 (D) RelyX Unicem: 9.1 ± 3 (E) G-Cem + Gluma DA: 13.4 ± 6.2 (F) G-Cem: 8.6 ± 2.2 |
Tensile strength Initial: Panavia 21 > G-Cem + Gluma DA > RelyX Unicem + Gluma DA > RelyX Unicem > G-Cem > Panavia 21 + Gluma DA After Ageing G-Cem + Gluma DA > RelyX Unicem + Gluma DA > RelyX Unicem > G-Cem > Panavia 21 > Panavia 21 + Gluma DA |
TS: Panavia 21 > RelyX Unicem > G-Cem |
RelyX Unicem & G-Cem (self-adhesive Resins) when used with Gluma DA displayed better long-term stability. |
| Patel et al., 2013, India [20] | In vitro | n = 55 (11 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 3 layer Ageing: 2500 cycles |
base metal porcelain metal alloy (Wirobond 280, BEGO, Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | One-Step—Resinomer, (Bisco) | phosphoric acid with Benzalkonium Chloride | (A) ZPC: (Harvard; Harvard Dental International GmbH, Hoppegarten, Germany) (B) GIC: (Vivaglass; Ivoclar vivadent Inc.,Buffalo, NY, USA) (C) Modified RC (Resinomer, Bisco Inc., Schaum-burg, IL, USA) |
Removal stress, UTM |
Removal stress (MPa) (A) ZPC: 3.5682 ± 0.2135 (B) ZPC + DA: 1.9209 ± 0.152 (C) GIC: 2.4082 ± 0.2581 (D) GIC + DA: 4.2609 ± 0.1963 (E) Modified RC: 6.9591 ± 0.5883 |
Removal stress: Modified RC > GIC + DA > GIC > ZPC > ZPC + DA |
Removal stress: RC > GIC > ZPC |
DA reduces retention with ZPC and increases retention with GIC. |
| Chandrasekaran et al., 2014, India [43] | In vitro | n = 81 (9 per group) | Human maxillary first premolars |
Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 6–10° Spacer: NM Ageing: No |
Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA | (A) & (B) Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Seal and protect (dentsply) (B) Tooth Mousse (GC) |
(A) D-TMR & PENTA (B) CPP-ACP |
(i) ZPC (Harvard cement, Harvard Dental International GmbH, Hoppegarten, Germany) (ii) GIC (GC Fuji 1, Tokyo, Japan) (iii) RMGIC (GC Fuji Plus, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) |
Bond strength; UTM | Mean Bond strength (MPa) (A) ZPC + SP DA: 249.25 ± 65.65 (B) ZPC + TM DA: 219 ± 49.30 (C) ZPC:295.12 ± 31.16 (D) GIC + SP DA: 345.49 ± 109.86 (E) GIC + TM DA: 421.46 ± 96.52 (F) GIC: 416.21 ± 113.10 (G) RMGIC + SP DA: 379.26 ± 114.59 (H) RMGIC + TM DA: 528.5 ± 67.65 (I) RMGIC: 537.2 ± 73.83 |
Mean Bond strength: RMGIC > RMGIC + TM DA > GIC + TM DA > GIC > RMGIC + SP DA > GIC + SP DA > ZPC > ZPC + SP DA > ZPC + TM DA |
Mean Bond strength: RMGIC > GIC > ZPC | Retentive strength: RMGIC: Control > TM > SP GIC: TM > Control > SP ZPC: Control > SP > TM TM & SP Can be used before crown cementation using GIC or RMGIC, but not with ZPC. |
| Kumar et al., 2015, India [44] | In vitro | n = 48 (12 per group) | Human maxillary first premolars |
NM | Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA | laser treatment Er, Cr: YSGG laser at 0.5 W potency for 15 s |
Desensitising Laser: Er, Cr: YSGG laser (NM) |
NA | (i) GIC (ii) self-adhesive RC |
TBS; UTM | TBS (N): GIC: 170 ± 7.519 GIC + DA:119.08 ± 5.350 RC: 244.33 ± 11.865 RC + DA: 269.16 ± 5.184 |
TBS: RC + DA > RC > GIC > GIC_DA |
TBS: RC > GIC |
The luting agent of choice for laser DA treated dentine: self-adhesive RC. |
| Chandavarkar et al., 2015 India [8] | In vitro | n = 50 (10 per group) | human premolars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 25 µ Ageing: No |
Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA | (A), (B), (D): Application of DA before final cementation (C) laser treatment Er, Cr: YSGG laser at 0.5 W potency for 45 s |
(A) Gluma Desensitizer, (Haereus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) (B) GC Tooth Mousse, Recaldent Tooth Mousse, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Ja-pan)). (C) Waterlase MD Turbo, Biolase Inc, Foothill Ranch, CA, USA) (D) Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief in-office polishing paste, New York, NY, USA) |
(A) GLU-based (B) CPP-ACP-based (C) Er, Cr: YSGG laser (D) Pro-Argin |
GIC | Tensile stress; UTM | Tensile stress (MPa); (A) GLU DA + GIC: 3.87 (B) CPP-ACP DA + GIC: 4.01 (C) Laser DA + GIC:3.37 (D) Pro-Argin DA + GIC: 4.10 (E) GIC: 3.65 |
Tensile stress: Pro-Argin DA + GIC > CPP-ACP DA + GIC > GLU DA + GIC > GIC > Laser DA + GIC |
- | Pro-Argin and CPP-ACP-based DA can be used safely without compromising the retention of cast crowns cemented with GIC. Laser as DA reduces the tensile stress when used with GIC. |
| Janapala et al., 2015, India [45] | In vitro | n = 40 (10 per group) | Human maxillary first premolars |
Finish line: NM Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: NM Ageing: No |
Full metal nickel chromium alloy copings (Bellabond, BEGO) Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Cavity varnish (Namuvar, Deepti Dental Products, Maharashtra, India) (B), Glutaraldehyde (Gluma-Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany), (C) Resin (AdheSE bond, Ivoclar Vivadent, Buffalo, NY, USA) |
(A) Dissolved solids (B) 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA (C) HEMA, dimethacrylate, silicon dioxide |
RMGIC (FujiCEM, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) |
TS, UTM |
Tensile strength (N) (A) RMGIC: 2.627 ± 1.1887 (B) RMGIC + Varnish: 1.968 ± 0.751 (C) RMGIC + GLUMA: 3.304 ± 0.762 (D) RMGIC + AdheSE: 4.042 ± 0.742 |
Tensile strength RMGIC + AdheSE > RMGIC + GLUMA > RMGIC > RMGIC + Varnish |
- | Recommends use of resin-based and glutaraldehyde-based sealers with RMGIC before crown cementation. |
| Lawaf et al., 2016, Iran [31] | In vitro | n = 20 (10 per group) | Human premolars |
Finish line: Deep chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 6° Spacer: 3 coats Ageing: No |
Full base metal alloy copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | GLUMA (Heraeus-Kulzer, Hanau, Germany ) | 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA | Self-adhesive RC (RelyX U200, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) | TBS; UTM | Tensile Bond Strength (N) (A) RC: 164.45 ± 39.3 (B) RC + GLUMA DA: 230.63 ± 63.8 |
TBS RC + GLUMA DA > RC |
- | Application of GLUMA DA on Hypersensitive prepared teeth before final cementation using self-adhesive RC. |
| Pilo et al., 2016, Israel [10] | In vitro | n = 40 (10 per group) | Human Mandibular molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 5 mm Taper: 10° Spacer: 50 µ Ageing: 10,000 cycles |
Zirconia crowns copings (Lava frame Y-TZP blocks, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) Fabrication technique: CAD/CAM milling |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief Desensitizing Paste (Colgate -Palmolive Company, New York, NY, USA) | 8% arginine and calcium carbonate |
(i) RMGIC (RelyX Luting 2, 3M ESPE) (ii) Self Adhesive RC (RelyX U-200, 3M ESPE) |
Retentive strength, UTM | Retentive strength (MPa) (A) RMGIC + DA: 2.92 ± 0.84 (B) RMGIC: 3.16 ± 0.73 (C) Self Adhesive RC + DA: 2.27 ± 0.64 (D) Self Adhesive RC: 2.29 ± 0.55 |
Retentive strength RMGIC > RMGIC + DA > RC > RC + DA |
Retentive strength RMGIC > RC |
Retentive strengths of zirconia crowns cemented by either RMGIC or RC remain unaltered when 8% A-C-C is used as DA. |
| Mapkar et al., 2018, India [11] | In vitro | n = 33 (11 per group) | Human maxillary first premolars |
Finish line: shoulder Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 1 layer Ageing: 2500 cycles |
Full metal base metal alloy copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Gluma (Heraeus Kulzer, hanau, Germany) (B) Ultraseal (Ultradent, South Jordan, UT USA) |
(A) 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA (B) Non polymerizable, high -molecular-weight resin |
ZPC (MEDIcept, Middlesex, UK). |
Dislodgement force, UTM | Dislodgement force (N): (A) ZPC:345.01 (B) ZPC + Gluma:556.41 ZPC + Ultraseal: 320.22 |
Dislodgement force: ZPC + Gluma > ZPC > ZPC + Ultraseal |
- | Significant increase in retention after application of Gluma DA, whereas non-significant decrease after Ultraseal application. |
| Pilo et al., 2018, Israel [39] | In vitro | n = 40 (10 per group) | Human Mandibular molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 5 mm Taper: 10° Spacer: 50 µ Ageing: 5000 cycles |
Full metal Co-Cr alloy Fabrication technique: selective laser melting (SLM) technology |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief Desensitizing Paste (Colgate-Palmolive Company, New York, NY, USA) |
8% arginine and calcium carbonate |
(i) GIC (ii) ZPC |
Retentive strength, UTM | Retentive strength (MPa) GIC + DA: 6.39 ± 1.06 GIC: 5.73 ± 1.10 ZPC + DA: 2.39 ± 0.99 ZPC: 3.10 ± 1.44 |
Retentive strength: GIC + DA > GIC > ZPC > ZPC + DA |
Retentive strength: GIC > ZPC |
Application of 8% arginine and calcium carbonate can be used safely without reducing the retentive strength of crowns cemented with GIC and/or ZPC. |
| Asadullah et al., 2018, India [46] | In vitro | n = 33 (11 per group) | Human maxillary first premolars |
Finish line: shoulder Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 20° Spacer: 1coat Ageing: 2500 cycles |
Full base metal alloy copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) ULTRASEAL (Ultradent, South Jordan, UT, USA) (B) GLUMA (Heraeus-Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) |
(A) non polymerizable, high -molecular-weight resin (B) 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA |
RC (RelyX, 3M ESPE) | Dislodgement force, UTM | Dislodgement force (N) (A) RC: 228.892 ## (B) RC + Ultra seal DA: 173.353 ## (C) RC + GLUMA DA: 339.098 ## |
Dislodgement force: RC + GLUMA > RC > RC + Ultra seal |
- | GLUMA DA can be safely used with RC whereas, Ultraseal DA should not be used with RC. |
| Himashilpa et al., 2019, India [35] | In vitro | n = 420 (10 per group) | Human maxillary premolars |
Finish line: Shoulder Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 12° Spacer: NM Ageing: No |
Full metal nickel chromium alloy copings Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Systemp (ivoclar vivadent, Liechtenstein) (B) Gluma (Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) (C) GC tooth Mousse (GC International, Itabashiku, Tokyo, Japan) (D) Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief Desensitizing Paste (Colgate-Palmolive Company, New York, NY, USA) (E) Sensodyne repair and protect (F) Sensodyne rapid action repair and protect |
(A) Poly(ethylene glycol)dimethacrylate and glutaraldehyde (B) 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA (C) CPP-ACP (D) 8% arginine and calcium carbonate (E) Novamin (F) Fluoride |
(A) GIC (Fuji luting GC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) (B) RMGIC: (RelyX Luting Cement 3M ESPE) (C) self-adhesive RC (Maxcem Elite, Kerr, Orange County, CA, USA) |
TBS, UTM | TBS (N) Thermocycling (A) GIC: 6.79 ± 0.74 (B) GIC + Systemp: 7.75 ± 0.67 (C) GIC + Gluma: 6.89 ± 0.66 (D) GIC + Mousse: 6.88 ± 0.65 (E) GIC + Arginine: 6.40 ± 0.86 (F) GIC + Novamin: 6.39 ± 0.36 (G) GIC + Flouride: 6.59 ± 1.32 (H) RMGIC: 8.26 ± 0.64 (I) RMGIC + Systemp: 8.44 ± 0.51 (J) RMGIC + Gluma: 8.13 ± 0.49 (K) RMGIC + Mousse: 7.80 ± 0.59 (L) RMGIC + Arginine: 8.15 ± 0.96 (M) RMGIC + Novamin: 8.05 ± 0.42 (N) RMGIC + Flouride: 7.37 ± 1.10 (O) RC: 9.85 ± 0.85 (P) RC + Systemp: 10.80 ± 0.91 (Q) RC + Gluma: 10.06 ± 0.77 (R) RC + Mousse: 9.97 ± 0.82 (S) RC + Arginine: 9.63 ± 0.80 (T) RC + Novamin: 9.49 ± 0.87 (U) RC + Flouride: 9.17 ± 0.64 Non-Thermocycling (A) GIC: 5.41 ± 1.02 (B) GIC + Systemp: 6.15 ± 0.49 (C) GIC + Gluma: 5.61 ± 0.89 (D) GIC + Mousse: 6.85 ± 0.71 (E) GIC + Arginine: 6.29 ± 0.43 (F) GIC + Novamin: 5.86 ± 0.49 (G) GIC + Flouride: 6.15 ± 1.10 (H) RMGIC: 6.58 ± 1.32 (I) RMGIC + Systemp: 7.54 ± 0.77 (J) RMGIC + Gluma: 7.47 ± 0.98 (K) RMGIC + Mousse: 7.35 ± 1.10 (L) RMGIC + Arginine: 6.54 ± 0.89 (M) RMGIC + Novamin:7.54 ± 0.34 (N) RMGIC + Flouride: 6.97 ± 0.61 (O) RC: 9.17 ± 0.52 (P) RC + Systemp: 9.25 ± 0.78 (Q) RC + Gluma: 9.12 ± 0.59 (R) RC + Mousse: 8.80 ± 0.78 (S) RC + Arginine: 8.64 ± 0.60 (T) RC + Novamin:8.75 ± 0.58 (U) RC + Flouride: 8.74 ± 0.64 |
TBS: Thermocycling Resin Cement: RC + Systemp > RC + Gluma > RC + Mousse > RC > RC + Arginine > RC + Novamin > RC + Flouride RMGIC: RMGIC + Systemp > RMGIC > RMGIC + Arginine > RMGIC + Gluma > RMGIC + Novamin > RMGIC + Mousse > RMGIC + Flouride GIC: GIC + Systemp > GIC + Gluma > GIC + Mousse > GIC > GIC + Flouride > GIC + Arginine > GIC + Novamin |
TBS: RC > RMGIC > GIC |
Highest TBS displayed by use of systemp DA, and lowest by Pro-Arginine in all groups. Thermocycling increased TBS |
| Supraja et al., 2020, India [47] | In vitro | n = 45 (5 per group) | Human Maxillary premolars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 6° Spacer: NM Ageing: No |
Full metal Co-Cr alloy Fabrication technique: additive manufacturing (direct metal laser sintering). |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) A-CC-F DA (custom made) (B) CPP-ACP-F DA (custom made) |
(A) Arginine, Calcium Carbonate, Fluoride (B) Casein Phosphopeptide, Amorphous Calcium Phosphate, Fluoride |
(i) GIC (NM) (ii) RMGIC (NM) (iii) RC (NM) |
TBS; UTM | TBS (N): GIC + A-CC-F DA: 90.26 ± 10.68 GIC + CPP-ACP-F DA: 272.32 ± 30.5 GIC: 308.62 ± 58.84 RMGIC + A-CC-F DA: 85.07 ± 18.82 RMGIC + CPP-ACP-F DA: 203.47 ± 60.57 RMGIC: 176.89 ± 35.46 RC + A-CC-F DA: 236.05 ± 43.62 RC + CPP-ACP-F DA: 158.66 ± 25.32 RC+: 300.35 ± 27.9 |
TBS: GIC: GIC > GIC + A-CC-F DA > GIC + CPP-ACP-F DA RMGIC: RMGIC + CPP-ACP-F DA > RMGIC > RMGIC + A-CC-F DA RC: RC > RC + A-CC-F DA > RC + CPP-ACP-F DA |
TBS: RC > RMGIC > GIC |
Application of both types of DA decreased TBS for GIC to dentin Application of CPP-ACP-F DA increased, while A-CC-F DA decreased the TBS for RMGIC to dentin Application of both types of DA decreased TBS for RC to dentin |
| Hanjik et al., 2021, Syria [48] | In vitro | n = 40 (10 per group) | Human Maxillary premolars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 6° Spacer: 2 layer, 1 mm above the finish line. Ageing: No |
Full metal Ni-Cr crown Fabrication technique: lost wax casting |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | Systemp desensitizer (ivoclar vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) |
Poly(ethylene glycol)dimethacrylate and glutaraldehyde in an aqueous solution | (i) GIC (Cavex, CJ Haarlem, The Netherlands) (ii) RMGIC (GC Fuji plus, Tokyo Japan) |
TBS; UTM | TBS (N): RMGIC + DA: 829.95 ±104.29 RMGIC + No DA:604.03 ± 127.20 GIC + DA: 415.74 ± 139.92 GIC + No DA: 433.74 ± 177.73 |
TBS: DA + RMGIC > RMGIC > GIC > DA + GIC |
TBS: RMGIC > GIC |
Application of DA increase TBS for RMGIC to dentin Application of DA decrease TBS for GIC to dentin |
| Dewan et al., 2022; Saudi Arabia [49] | In vitro | n = 40 (10 per group) | Human molars | Finish line: Chamfer Axial height: 4 mm Taper: 10° Spacer: NM Ageing: 3000 cycles |
Zirconia copings (Ceramill ZI, Austria) Fabrication technique: CAD/CAM milling |
No DA applied | Application of DA before final cementation | (A) Gluma (Heraeus Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) (B) Telio CS (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) (C) Shield Force Plus (Tokuyama Dental, Encinitas, CA, USA) |
(A) 5% Glutaraldehyde & HEMA (B) PEGDMA, Glutaraldehyde (C) HPDMA & PA |
RC (Rely X U200, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA ) | TS, UTM |
TS (MPa) (A) RC: 0.22 ± 0.03 (B) RC + Gluma: 0.53 ± 0.08 (C) RC + Telio CS: 0.35 ± 0.10 (D) RC + Shield force: 0.36 ± 0.14 |
TS: RC + Gluma > RC + Shield force > Rc + Telio CS > RC |
- | Advocates using the tested DAs before cementing Zirconia crowns. |
TBS: tensile bond strength; DA: desensitizing agent; RMGIC: resin-modified glass ionomer cement; Ni-Cr: nickel chromium; Co-Cr: cobalt chromium; A-C-C-F: arginine–calcium carbonate–fluoride; A-C-C: arginine–calcium carbonate; CPP-ACP-F: casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate–fluoride; NM: not mentioned, RC: resin cement; ZPC: zinc phosphate cement; UTM: universal testing machine; Er, Cr: YSGG: erbium, chromium:yttrium, selenium, galium, garnet; NM: not mentioned; GLU: glutaraldehyde; D-TMR: di- and trimethacrylate resin; SP: seal and protect; TM: tooth MousseMousse; PENTA: dipentaerythritol penta acrylate monophosphate; HEMA: 2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylate; PCC: polycarboxylate cement; NTG-GMA: N-olyglycine glycidyl methacrylate; BPDM: biphenyl dimethacrylate; UDMA: urethane dimethacrylate; TEGMA: tolnyl ethyl glycidal dimethacrylate; PEGDMA: polyethylene glycol dimethacrylate; HPDMA: hydroxy propoxy dimethacrylate; PA: phosphoric acid; ##: data retrieved from plot digitizer app.