Search

Objectives: Currently, a classification of resin cements that includes relatively recently formulated ("universal") cements is lacking. Furthermore, the terminology used to define different resin cements in the scientific reports is inconsistent. Accordingly, this work aims to: (i) propose a novel classification of resin composite cements; (ii) disambiguate the term "universal cements" and (iii) present an overview of the properties of these cements. Methods: An analysis of peer‐reviewed literature (PubMed search), as well as market research on definitive resin composite cements were performed. Results: A tendency toward simplified and versatile luting materials was observed both in the scientific literature and on the dental market with the advent of self‐adhesive/one‐step resin cements. However, additional priming procedures were necessary to improve their bonding performance in certain clinical situations. Hence, several cements that can be applied both in adhesive and self‐adhesive mode were introduced. These cements are associated with a universal adhesive resin, that can be used as a tooth and/or restorative material primer, without the need for other priming systems, regardless of the substrate. These systems should be considered truly universal. Therefore, we hereby suggested a new classification of resin‐based cements: (1) adhesive/multi‐step; (2) self‐adhesive/one‐step; (3) universal cements (one‐ or multi‐step). Despite promising in vitro results, clinical trials and long‐track laboratory studies are necessary to confirm the reliability of the universal cements. Conclusions: This review presented the current advances in the field of resin‐based cements, which are reflected in the proposed classification. The term "universal cement" was disambiguated, which will help standardize the terminology used in published research. Clinical Significance: The classification of resin‐based cements and a better understanding of the proper terminology will help standardize the terminology in published research, as well as improve the understanding of the clinical practitioners of the different indications and possible modalities of use of the available cements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To examine the effect of CHX pre-treatment on long-term bond strength of fiber posts luted with self-adhesive resin cements. Materials and Methods: Seventy-two single-rooted teeth were selected for root canal treatment and post space preparation. The tested self-adhesive cement/post combinations were (N = 36): 1. RelyX Fiber-Posts luted with RelyX Unicem; 2. Rebilda Posts luted with Bifix SE Cement. For both self-adhesive cements, half of the specimens (experimental groups) were luted after the application of a solution of 2% CHX, while no CHX application was performed for the remaining specimens (control groups). Luted specimens were cut and used for push-out bond strength evaluation immediately, and after storage in artificial saliva for 6 months or 1 year. Additional specimens were processed for quantitative interfacial nanoleakage analysis. Results: ANOVA showed that the variable times of storage had a significant influence on the results (p < 0.05), while no influence of the luting procedure (cements with or without CHX) on the final outcome (p > 0.05) was found. Tukey’s pairwise post-hoc test showed that the radicular bond strength decreased with time of storage. In particular, a significant difference was found between T0 and T1y, but not between T0 and T6m. In contrast, in terms of pre-treatment, no significant reduction in push-out bond strength was observed, irrespective of the aging time. Conclusion: CHX pretreatment did not prevent bond strength degradation of fiber posts luted with self-adhesive cements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]