Flexural Strength, Elastic Modulus, and pH Profile of Self‐etch Resin Luting Cements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the flexural strength, modulus of elasticity, and 24-hour pH profile of three self-etching resin luting cements and to obtain comparative data for representative conventional resin and resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three self-etching resin luting cements [RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE), Maxcem (Kerr), Embrace Wetbond (Pulpdent)] were tested and compared with two conventional resin cements [RelyX ARC (3M ESPE), Linkmax (GC)] plus two resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements [Fuji Plus (GC), RelyX Luting Plus (3M ESPE)]. Flexural strength and modulus of elasticity were determined using bar-shaped specimens (2 x 2 x 25 mm(3)) at 24 hours, using an Instron universal testing machine. Setting pH was measured using a flat-surface pH electrode at 0, 2, 5, 15, and 30 minutes and 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours after mixing. Testing was performed under both dual-cured and self-cured conditions for all dual-cure cements. Data analysis included ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The self-etching cements showed similar flexural strength to the conventional resin cements, except for Embrace Wetbond self-cured, which was considerably lower. Modulus of elasticity results were both higher and lower than for conventional resin cements. All photopolymerized conventional and self-etch dual-cure cements showed markedly higher flexural strength and modulus than when solely self-cured. The resin-modified glass ionomer cements were characterized by lower flexural strength and elastic modulus. Self-etching resin cements showed lower initial pH (2.0 to 2.4) than conventional resin cements (4.8 to 5.2) and a wide range of final pH values (3.9 to 7.3) at 24 hours. One self-etching cement (Unicem) revealed a unique pH profile characterized by a more rapid rise in pH to neutrality both when dual-cured (15 minutes) and when auto-cured (1 hour). CONCLUSIONS: The self-etching resin cements evaluated in this study displayed disparate properties and cannot be considered a homogeneous group. Flexural strength properties were most uniform and were similar to those of the conventional resin cements, whereas moduli of elasticity showed greater variation. Setting pH profiles differed, depending on the brand and mode of cure, even within the same category of luting cement. All cements with dual-cure capability, both conventional and self-etch, showed significantly superior properties when photopolymerized.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".