Thani Alsharari*

Department of Restorative Dental Science, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Saudi Arabia

*Corresponding Author: Thani Alsharari, Department of Restorative Dental Science, Faculty of Dentistry, Taif University, Saudi Arabia

Received: January 16, 2025; Published: February 08, 2025

Abstract

Resin cement bonded porcelain veneers, a cornerstone of dentistry aesthetics, exhibits superior mechanical and aesthetic properties. However, limitations such as handling challenges, polymerization shrinkage, and marginal discrepancies necessitate exploring other composite alternatives. Flowable composites, originally designed for other restorative purposes, have emerged as a potential alternative for veneer bonding. This study examines the potential of using flowable composites as a substitute for resin cement, assessing their mechanical characteristics, adhesion capabilities, visual results, and practical applications in clinical settings. Evidence suggests that flowable composites provide comparable bond strength, lower viscosity, and financial advantages, while delivering satisfactory aesthetic results. However, further clinical research is required to validate their long-term performance and effectiveness.

Keywords: Flowable Composites; Resin Cements; Porcelain Veneers; Dental Bonding; Aesthetic Dentistry; Restorative Materials

References

1. Calamia J. “The etched porcelain veneer technique”. The New York State Dental Journal 7 (1988): 48.
2. Shetty A., et al. “Survival rates of porcelain laminate restoration based on different incisal preparation designs: An analysis”. Journal of Conservative Dentistry1 (2011): 10-15.
3. Soares C., et al. “Surface treatment protocols in the cementation process of ceramic and laboratory-composite restorations: a literature review”. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 17 (2005): 224-235.
4. Li Z and White S. “Mechanical properties of dental luting cements”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 6 (1999): 597-609.
5. Hassanien EE and Tolba ZO. “Flowable Composite as an Alternative to Adhesive Resin Cement in Bonding Hybrid CAD/CAM Materials: In-Vitro Study of Micro-Shear Bond Strength”. BDJ Open 10 (2024): 66.
6. Dikici B and Say EC. “Bonding of Different Resin Luting Materials to Composite, Polymer-Infiltrated, and Feldspathic Ceramic CAD/CAM Blocks”. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology 14 (2022): 1572-1592.
7. Chen TA., et al. “Effects of Ceramic Thickness, Ceramic Translucency, and Light Transmission on Light-Cured Bulk-Fill Resin Composites as Luting Cement of Lithium Disilicate-Based Ceramics”. Journal of Prosthodontic Research 2 (2024): 255-263.
8. Odabasi D., et al. “Evaluation of the Amount of Residual Monomer Released from Different Flowable Composite Resins”. BMC Oral Health 24 (2024): 244.
9. Baroudi K and Rodrigues JC. “Flowable Resin Composites: A Systematic Review and Clinical Considerations”. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 6 (2015): ZE18-24.
10. Prieto LT., et al. “Evaluation of Degree of Conversion and the Effect of Thermal Aging on the Color Stability of Resin Cements and Flowable Composite”. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 1 (2018): 47-51.
11. Maletin A., et al. “Dental Resin-Based Luting Materials-Review”. Polymers4156 (2023):1-21.

Citation

Citation: Thani Alsharari. “Feasibility of Flowable Composite as an Alternative to Resin Cement in Porcelain Veneer Bonding". Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 9.3 (2025): 08-10.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2025 Thani Alsharari. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.