The assessment of the effect of various surface treatments on the shear bond strength of three different intraoral ceramic repair methods

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Premkumari S. Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Yttrium Aluminum Garnet ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Laser Surface ◽  
Repair System ◽  
Laser Surface Treatment ◽  
Repair Systems

The aim of this study is to assess the shear security quality of two intra oral clay fix frameworks on metal substrate and fired substrate and to contrast among gatherings with evaluate a superior earthenware fix framework after corrosive scratching and laser surface treatment. Therefore, 40 Nickel chromium and 40 feldspathic ceramic specimens were fabricated and divided into two main groups which were further subdivided into four subgroups based on the repair systems used and surface treatments, which had ten specimens each. Hydrofluoric acid and Erbium-doped Yttrium aluminum garnet laser were used as surface treatments and two intra oral repair systems used were Bisco and Angelus. Bonded specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours before being thermocycled at 5°C to 55°C for 300 cycles with a 30-second dwell time. The specimens were stored for an additional 7 days before being subjected to shear force in a universal testing machine with a 10KN load cell at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The bond strength values obtained were recorded in MPa and analyzed using independent t test. The outcomes indicate that the shear bond strength values obtained were highly significant for Bisco when compared to Angelus for both the metal and ceramic substrates. Similarly, after acid etching and laser surface treatment, Bisco proved to be better. At the end, Bisco repair system had significantly higher shear bond strength values when compared to Angelus. Hence it is the preferred choice for intraoral repair of fractured metal ceramic restorations. Er: YAG laser surface treatment is the recommended surface treatment for intraoral repair. Available online at https://int-scientific-journals.com

scholarly journals Effect of surface treatment of prefabricated teeth on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 47-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Cumerlato ◽  
Eduardo Martinelli de Lima ◽  
Leandro Berni Osorio ◽  
Eduardo Gonçalves Mota ◽  
Luciane Macedo de Menezes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Diamond Bur ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the effects of grinding, drilling, sandblasting, and ageing prefabricated teeth (PfT) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets, as well as the effects of surface treatments on the adhesive remnant index (ARI). Methods: One-hundred-ninety-two PfT were divided into four groups (n = 48): Group 1, no surface treatment was done; Group 2, grinding was performed with a cylindrical diamond bur; Group 3, two drillings were done with a spherical diamond bur; Group 4, sandblasting was performed with 50-µm aluminum oxide. Before the experiment, half of the samples stayed immersed in distilled water at 37oC for 90 days. Brackets were bonded with Transbond XT and shear strength tests were carried out using a universal testing machine. SBS were compared by surface treatment and by ageing with two-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s test. ARI scores were compared between surface treatments with Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn’s test. Results: Surface treatments on PfT enhanced SBS of brackets (p< 0.01), result not observed with ageing (p= 0.45). Groups II, III, and IV showed higher SBS and greater ARI than the Group 1 (p< 0.05). SBS was greater in the groups 3 and 4 (drilling, sandblasting) than in the Group 2 (grinding) (p< 0.05). SBS and ARI showed a positive correlation (Spearman’s R2= 0.57; p< 0.05). Conclusion: Surface treatment on PfT enhanced SBS of brackets, however ageing did not show any relevance. Sandblasting and drilling showed greater SBS than grinding. There was a positive correlation between SBS and ARI.

scholarly journals Bond Strength Assessment Between Acrylic Teeth and Acrylic Resin Repairs: Effect of Different Surface Treatments

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
M.T. Muñoz MSc ◽  
E. Reales DDS ◽  
L.H.M. Prates DDS, MSc, PhD ◽  
C.A.M. Volpato DDS, MSc, PhD
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Strength Assessment ◽  
Chemical Treatments ◽  
Post Hoc

The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength between acrylic resin teeth and autopolymerizing acrylic resin repairs after different surface treatments. Seventy-two upper anterior acrylic resin denture teeth (MFT, Vita, Germany) were selected. Specimens were randomly assigned into six groups (n=12): G1-C, without surface treatment (control); G2-M, methylmetacrylate monomer (Jet, Clássico, Brazil) application; G3-A treatment with methylmetacrylate and metiletilcetone-based bonding agent (Vitacoll, Vita, Germany). The surface of G4-OA, G5-OAM and G6-OAA was airborne-particle abraded with aluminum oxide (Polidental, Wilson, Brazil); being repeated the treatments respectively of groups G1-C, G2-M e G3-A. All groups were then repaired with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (Jet, Clássico, Brazil). Shear bond strength test was performed using an universal testing machine (Instron 4444). Two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s analysis (p<0,05) were used for statistical comparison. The shear bond strengths of groups G4-OA, G5-OAM and G6-OAA were significantly higher (p<0,05) than that of groups G1-C, G2-M and G3-A. The shear bond strength of Group G3-A were significantly higher (p<0,05) than that of groups G1-C and G2-M. In conclution, chemical treatments in combination with bondig agents showed significant improvements in bond strength without aluminum oxide treatment. More significantly, surface treatment with aluminum oxide particles resulted in the highest bond strength values for acrylic resin teeth repaired with autopolymerizing acrylic resin. 

scholarly journals Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Atef Baiomy ◽  
Jihan Farouk Younis ◽  
Ahmed Hassanen Khalil
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Treatment Method ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Repair System ◽  
Cohesive Failure ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Composite Repair ◽  
Mode Of Failure

Objective:  the study is aimed to evaluate the effect of different surface treatment methods on shear bond strength between composite repair system and both of zirconia core and veneering porcelain and analyze the mode of failure between composite repair and ceramic surface. Material and methods: 40 Ceramic discs were fabricated with diameter of 7mm and 3mm thickness and divided according to material into two groups, Zirconia core discs (n = 20) and veneering porcelain discs (n = 20). Specimens were thermocycled and then each group was subdivided according to surface treatment method into 4 equal sub groups (n = 5) ,control subgroup I air abrasion, subgroup II Cojet, subgroup III laser, subgroup IV combination of air abrasion and laser surface treatment. Composite blocks were built up and polymerized on the surface of the specimens and shear bond strength of composite to each specimen was tested using a universal testing machine and mode of failure was evaluated using stereomicroscope. Results: Regardless of ceramic type; there was a statistically significant difference between surface treatments. Cojet recorded the highest mean shear bond strength. Laser showed the highest prevalence of adhesive failure.  Porcelain + Cojet showed the highest prevalence of cohesive failure. Conclusion: Cojet surface treatment provided superior shear bond strength regardless of the ceramic type whether zirconia or porcelain. Porcelain provided superior shear bond strength values in comparison to zirconia regardless of the surface treatment method tested. Porcelain showed higher percentage of cohesive failure that while the mode of failure in zirconia was most commonly adhesive.KEYWORDS Laser; Porcelain repair; Zirconia repair. 

scholarly journals Bond Strength Assessment Between Acrylic Teeth and Acrylic Resin Repairs: Effect of Different Surface Treatments

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
M.T. Muñoz MSc ◽  
E. Reales DDS ◽  
L.H.M. Prates DDS, MSc, PhD ◽  
C.A.M. Volpato DDS, MSc, PhD
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Strength Assessment ◽  
Chemical Treatments ◽  
Post Hoc

The aim of this study was to compare the shear bond strength between acrylic resin teeth and autopolymerizing acrylic resin repairs after different surface treatments. Seventy-two upper anterior acrylic resin denture teeth (MFT, Vita, Germany) were selected. Specimens were randomly assigned into six groups (n=12): G1-C, without surface treatment (control); G2-M, methylmetacrylate monomer (Jet, Clássico, Brazil) application; G3-A treatment with methylmetacrylate and metiletilcetone-based bonding agent (Vitacoll, Vita, Germany). The surface of G4-OA, G5-OAM and G6-OAA was airborne-particle abraded with aluminum oxide (Polidental, Wilson, Brazil); being repeated the treatments respectively of groups G1-C, G2-M e G3-A. All groups were then repaired with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (Jet, Clássico, Brazil). Shear bond strength test was performed using an universal testing machine (Instron 4444). Two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s analysis (p<0,05) were used for statistical comparison. The shear bond strengths of groups G4-OA, G5-OAM and G6-OAA were significantly higher (p<0,05) than that of groups G1-C, G2-M and G3-A. The shear bond strength of Group G3-A were significantly higher (p<0,05) than that of groups G1-C and G2-M. In conclution, chemical treatments in combination with bondig agents showed significant improvements in bond strength without aluminum oxide treatment. More significantly, surface treatment with aluminum oxide particles resulted in the highest bond strength values for acrylic resin teeth repaired with autopolymerizing acrylic resin. 

scholarly journals Effect of Surface Treatment and Storage Time on Immediate Repair Bond Strength Durability of Methacrylate- and Ormocer-Based Bulk Fill Resin Composites

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (22) ◽  
pp. 8308
Author(s):  
Farid S. El-Askary ◽  
Sara A. Botros ◽  
Mutlu Özcan
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Storage Time ◽  
Strength Testing ◽  
Repair System ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Oxygen Inhibition ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Effect Of Surface

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatment and storage time on immediate repair bond durability of methacrylate- and ormocer-based bulk fill composites. In total, 265 discs were divided into 32 groups (n = 8/group) according to: (1) Material: X-tra fil and Admira Fusion X-tra; (2) Surface treatment: oxygen inhibition; matrix; Futurabond M+; Silane/Futurabond M+; Admira Bond; Silane/Admira Bond; ceramic repair system; and Silane/Cimara bond; and (3) Storage time: 24 h and 6 months. Each disc received three micro-cylinders from the same material. Specimens were subjected to micro-shear bond strength testing either at 24 h or 6 months. Data were analyzed using ANOVA/Tukey’s test/Student t-test (p = 0.05). All experimental factors had significant effect on bond strength (p < 0.0001). Drop in bond strength was noticed in both materials after six months (p < 0.05), except for Admira Fusion X-tra treated with silane/cimara adhesive (p = 0.860). Both materials showed insignificant values with Admira bond either at 24 h or 6 months (p = 0.275 and p = 0.060, respectively). For other treatments, X-tra fil showed significantly higher values at 24 h and 6 months (p < 0.05). Ceramic repair system can be used to immediately repair both methacrylate- and ormocer-based composites.

scholarly journals Effects of Universal Adhesive on Shear Bond Strength of Resin Cement to Zirconia Ceramic with Different Surface Treatments

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Zohreh Moradi ◽  
Farnoosh Akbari ◽  
Sara Valizadeh
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Zirconia Ceramic ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Universal Adhesive

Aim. This study aimed to assess shear bond strength (SBS) of resin cement to zirconia ceramic with different surface treatments by using Single Bond Universal. Methods. In this in vitro study, 50 zirconia discs (2 × 6 mm) were divided into 5 groups of (I) sandblasting with silica-coated alumina (CoJet)  + silane + Single Bond 2, (II) sandblasting with CoJet + Single Bond Universal, (III) sandblasting with alumina + Single Bond Universal, (IV) sandblasting with alumina + Z-Prime Plus, and (V) Single Bond Universal with no surface treatment. Resin cement was applied in plastic tubes (3 × 5 mm2), and after 10,000 thermal cycles, the SBS was measured by a universal testing machine. The mode of failure was determined under a stereomicroscope at × 40 magnification. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. Results. The maximum (6.56 ± 4.29 MPa) and minimum (1.94 ± 1.96 MPa) SBS values were noted in groups III and I, respectively. Group III had the highest frequency of mixed failure (60%). Group V had the maximum frequency of adhesive failure (100%). Conclusion. Single Bond Universal + sandblasting with alumina or silica-coated alumina particles is an acceptable method to provide a strong SBS between resin cement and zirconia.

scholarly journals Assessment the Bond Strength of Ceramic Brackets to CAD/CAM Nanoceramic Composite and Interpenetrating Network Composite after Different Surface Treatments

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Mehmet Özarslan ◽  
Özlem Üstün ◽  
Ulviye Sebnem Buyukkaplan ◽  
Çağatay Barutcigil ◽  
Nurullah Türker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Interpenetrating Network ◽  
Bonding Performance ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Ceramic Brackets ◽  
New Generation

Adult orthodontics may confront problems related to the bonding performance of orthodontic brackets to new generation restorative materials used for crown or laminate restorations. The aim of the present study was to investigate the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets to two new generation CAD/CAM interpenetrating network composite and nanoceramic composite after different surface treatments. Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, hydrofluoric acid (9%), sandblasting (50 μm Al2O3), and silane were applied to the surfaces of 120 CAD/CAM specimens with 2 mm thickness and then ceramic brackets were bonded to the treated surfaces of the specimens. Bond strength was evaluated using the shear bond strength test. According to the results, CAD/CAM block types and surface treatment methods have significant effects on shear bond strength. The lowest bond strength values were found in the specimens treated with silane (3.35 ± 2.09 MPa) and highest values were found in the specimens treated with sandblast (8.92 ± 2.77 MPa). Sandblasting and hydrofluoric acid surface treatment led to the most durable bonds for the two types of CAD/CAM blocks in the present study. In conclusion, different surface treatments affect the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets to CAD/CAM interpenetrating network composite and nanoceramic composite. Among the evaluated treatments, sandblasting and hydrofluoric acid application resulted in sufficient bonding strength to ceramic brackets for both of the CAD/CAM materials.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document