Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review.

The longevity of fixed partial denture depends on the type of luting cement used with tooth preparation. The clinician's understating of various cements, their advantages and disadvantages is of utmost importance. In recent years, many luting agents cements have been introduced claiming clinically better performance than existing materials due to improved characteristics. Both conventional and contemporary dental luting cements are discussed here. The various agents discussed are: Zinc phosphate, Zinc polycarboxylate, Zinc oxide-eugenol, Glass-ionomer, Resin modified GIC, Compomers and Resin cement. The purpose of this article is to provide a discussion that provides a clinical perspective of luting cements currently available to help the general practitioner make smarter and appropriate choices. How to cite the article: Lad PP, Kamath M, Tarale K, Kusugal PB. Practical clinical considerations of luting cements: A review. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(1):116-20.

[1]  Gary Alex.  Preparing porcelain surfaces for optimal bonding. , 2008, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.

[2]  Alan D. Wilson,et al.  Acid-Base Cements: Their Biomedical and Industrial Applications , 1993 .

[3]  Smith Dc.  Dental cements. Current status and future prospects. , 1983 .

[4]  C. Davidson.  Advances in glass-ionomer cements. , 2006, Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB.

[5]  C. Petrie,et al.  A comparison of 3 alloy surface treatments for resin-bonded prostheses. , 2001, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[6]  R Scotti,et al.  Comparative study of the marginal microleakage of six cements in fixed provisional crowns. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[7]  E. E. Hill.  Dental cements for definitive luting: a review and practical clinical considerations. , 2007, Dental clinics of North America.

[8]  Donovan Te,et al.  Contemporary evaluation of dental cements. , 1999 .

[9]  G. Pradíes,et al.  Conventional and adhesive luting cements , 2002, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[10]  P. Marquis,et al.  Are adhesive technologies needed to support ceramics? An assessment of the current evidence. , 2002, The journal of adhesive dentistry.

[11]  R. G. Craig.  Restorative dental materials , 1971 .

[12]  G. H. Johnson,et al.  The effect of a resin-based sealer on crown retention for three types of cement. , 2004, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[13]  G. Christensen.  Why is glass ionomer cement so popular? , 1994, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[14]  W. J. O'brien,et al.  Dental Materials and Their Selection , 2002 .

[15]  G. Mount.  An Atlas of Glass-Ionomer Cements: A Clinician's Guide , 2001 .

[16]  R. Carvalho,et al.  Cements for use in esthetic dentistry. , 2007, Dental clinics of North America.

[17]  N. Sandalli,et al.  Fluoride release/uptake of glass-ionomer cements and polyacid-modified composite resins. , 2005, Dental materials journal.

[18]  R. Phillips,et al.  Materials for the practicing dentist , 1969 .

[19]  J. Meyer,et al.  Compomers: between glass-ionomer cements and composites. , 1998, Biomaterials.

[20]  A M Diaz-Arnold,et al.  Current status of luting agents for fixed prosthodontics. , 1999, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[21]  Carl F Driscoll,et al.  Comparison of two luting agents used for the retention of cast dowel and cores. , 2005, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[22]  E. E. Hill,et al.  A clinically focused discussion of luting materials. , 2011, Australian dental journal.

[23]  S. Rosenstiel,et al.  Dental luting agents: A review of the current literature. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[24]  G. Gürel.  The Science and Art of Porcelain Laminate Veneers , 2003 .

[25]  D. McComb.  Adhesive luting cements--classes, criteria, and usage. , 1996, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.