Effects of microstructural change of zirconia surface on tensile bond strength with resin cement

2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-219
Author(s):  
Jeong-Gyu Kang ◽  
Tae-Yeon Kim ◽  
Jung-Hwan Lee ◽  
Jeong-Hui Ji ◽  
Min-Ho Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Microstructural Change ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength

Tensile bond strength of an adhesive resin cement to different alloys having various surface treatments

2009 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amara Abreu ◽  
Maria A. Loza ◽  
Augusto Elias ◽  
Siuli Mukhopadhyay ◽  
Stephen Looney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement

scholarly journals The finish line location of the cemented crown is an influencing factor for tensile bond strength, marginal adaption and nanoleakage?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Angelo ◽  
Rodrigo Esteves Barros Lins ◽  
Luis Roberto Marcondes Martins
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Epoxy Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Influencing Factor ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Adhesive Failure ◽  
Finish Line ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Spearman Correlation Test

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different crowns finishing line location on the crown tensile bond strength, marginal adaption and nanoleakage. Material and Methods: Sixty healthy third molars were collected. For tensile bond strength, a self-adhesive resin cement was used. For marginal adaption, epoxy resin models were prepared. Prior to tensile bond strength test, images for the epoxy resin models were measured under scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Nanoleakage was measured using same protocol. Failure mode was evaluated through SEM and classified: adhesive failure, cohesive in cement, cohesive in dentin, cohesive in resin composite, cohesive in enamel, and mixed. Statistical analysis was performed using Shapiro-Wilk and Kolmogorov Smirnov normality tests, two-way ANOVA, Bonferroni (posthoc) parametric test, with significance level of 5% (P < .05), Spearman correlation test. Results: tensile bond strength was not statistically different between the cemented groups with composite resin and ceramic. Cementation of ceramic was not statistically different between the groups (enamel, 3.28 Pa; dentin, 3.14 Pa; resin, 2.85 Pa). Marginal adaption was statistically different between resin and ceramic; finish line location varied between enamel and resin (175.91 μm vs. 433.58 μm). Nanoleakage rate was statistically different among all groups, except for resin: with resin (9.49%) and ceramic (9.35%). There was a predominance of adhesive failure in all groups. Conclusion: finish line location can be performed safely in enamel and dentin. Composite resinas substrate present an alternative, but still need to be more studied. Regarding the crown’s material, it is possible to perform a satisfatory restoration in both: resin and ceramic. With ceramics presenting better results. KEYWORDSResin composite; Ceramics; Tensile bond strengh; Marginal adaption; Nanoleakage.

scholarly journals The difference of bond strength between multi step and self adhesive resin cements in indirect composite restoration

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Myrna Nurlatifah Zakaria ◽  
Moch. Richata Fadil ◽  
Milly Armilia
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
The Self ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Dentin Surface ◽  
Indirect Composite ◽  
Adhesive Resin Cement ◽  
Composite Restoration

Resin based luting cement application generally requires pre-treatment procedure such as etching and adhesive application prior to cementation. This multi-step application technique might compromise bonding alternative effectiveness and is time consuming. An alternative for multi-step resin cement is the self-adhesive resin cement that combines the use of etch, adhesive and cement in one single application. The objective of this study was to compare the bonding effectiveness of the multi-step resin cement and the self-adhesive resin cement using tensile bond strength method towards indirect composite block dentin surface. This study was a true experimental research conducted by in vitro method on 30 flat dentin surfaces created from extracted lower premolars samples. Samples were divided into two groups, each 15 samples for multi-step and self-adhesive resin cements. An indirect composite block (2x2x10 mm) was then cemented to each dentin surface using multi-step resin cement (Rely X ARC, 3M ESPE) or self-adhesive resin cement (Rely X Unicem, 3M ESPE) according to manufacture’s instruction. Samples were storage for 24 hours in saline water and tensile bond strength of each samples were tested using the LRX Plus Lyod Instrument at 1 mm/minute speed. The result of the study concluded that the tensile bond strength of multi-step resin cement towards indirect composite restoration and dentin surface was significantly higher than the self-adhesive resin cement.

scholarly journals Tensile bond strength of glass fiber posts luted with different cements

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerson Bonfante ◽  
Osvaldo Bazzan Kaizer ◽  
Luiz Fernando Pegoraro ◽  
Accácio Lins do Valle
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Glass Fiber ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Fiber Posts ◽  
Glass Fiber Posts ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Proper selection of the luting agent is fundamental to avoid failure due to lack of retention in post-retained crowns. The objective of this study was to investigate the tensile bond strength and failure mode of glass fiber posts luted with different cements. Glass fiber posts were luted in 40 mandibular premolars, divided into 4 groups (n = 10): Group 1 - resin-modified glass ionomer RelyX Luting; Group 2 - resin-modified glass ionomer Fuji Plus; Group 3 - resin cement RelyX ARC; Group 4 - resin cement Enforce. Specimens were assessed by tensile strength testing and light microscopy analysis for observation of failure mode. The tensile bond strength values of each group were compared by ANOVA and Tukey test. The significance level was set at 5%. The failure modes were described as percentages. The following tensile strength values were obtained: Group 1 - 247.6 N; Group 2 - 256.7 N; Group 3 - 502.1 N; Group 4 - 477.3 N. There was no statistically significant difference between Groups 1 and 2 or between Groups 3 and 4, yet the resin cements presented significantly higher tensile bond strength values than those presented by the glass ionomer cements. Group 1 displayed 70% of cohesive failures, whereas Groups 2, 3 and 4 exhibited 70% to 80% of adhesive failures at the dentin-cement interface. We concluded that resin cements and glass ionomer cements are able to provide clinically sufficient retention of glass fiber posts, and that glass ionomer cements may be especially indicated when the application of adhesive techniques is difficult.

Micro-Tensile Bond Strength Between a Resin Cement and an Aluminous Ceramic Treated with Nd:YAG Laser, Rocatec System, or Aluminum Oxide Sandblasting

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 543-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Lopes Da Silveira ◽  
Adriane Paglia ◽  
Luiz Henrique Burnett ◽  
Rosemary Sadami Arai Shinkai ◽  
Carlos De Paula Eduardo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Nd:Yag Laser ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document