Tack-cure vs conventional polymerization methods: A systematic review on resin composite cements' properties

This systematic review aimed to address the following research question: "What is the effect of tack-cure compared to conventional polymerization methods on the resin composite cements' properties?".

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across electronic databases, including Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest, without language or publication date restrictions. In vitro studies comparing tack-cure (TC) with conventional polymerization methods (light-cure, LC, and/or self-cure, SC) were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUIN tool for in vitro studies. This systematic review was reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.

Sixteen relevant articles were included in this systematic review. According to the QUIN tool, 1 study was ranked as "low risk," 12 studies as "medium risk," and 3 studies as "high risk" of bias. The resin cements evaluated were mainly dual-cure (DC) adhesive/multistep and self-adhesive/one step materials, whereas only 1 universal cement was investigated. Overall, TC provided comparable or superior mechanical properties compared to LC, and consistently outperformed SC alone. Furthermore, TC facilitated excess cement removal and improved interface quality. However, outcomes varied depending on the type of resin cement, polymerization protocol, and evaluation method.

TC can provide mechanical properties and interface quality comparable or superior to conventional polymerization methods, while facilitating excess cement removal.

TC appears to be a clinically useful technique that enhances handling without adversely affecting resin composite cements' properties. Clinicians should always follow manufacturers' instructions and consider cement-specific characteristics.