scholarly journals Effect of the Surface Treatment Method Using Airborne-Particle Abrasion and Hydrofluoric Acid on the Shear Bond Strength of Resin Cement to Zirconia

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ju-Hyoung Lee ◽  
Cheong-Hee Lee
2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 290-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Paulo Nagayassu ◽  
Luciana Keiko Shintome ◽  
Eduardo Shigueyuki Uemura ◽  
José Eduardo Junho de Araújo

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength of a resin-based cement to porcelain. Sixty pairs of 50% aluminous porcelain discs were fabricated. In each pair, one disc measured 6 mm in diameter X 3 mm thickness (A) and the other measured 3 mm in diameter X 3mm thickness (B). The specimens were randomly assigned to 6 groups (n=10 pairs of discs), according to the surface treatment: etching with 10% hydrofluoric acid for 2 or 4min (G1 and G2); 50-µm particle aluminum oxide sandblasting for 5 s (G3); sandblasting followed by etching for 2 or 4min (G4 and G5) and control - no treatment (G6). A silane agent was applied to the treated surface of both discs of each pair. Bistite II DC dual-cure resin cement was applied and the B discs were bonded to their respective A discs. Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 24 h and were tested in shear strength at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/min. Means in MPa were: G1: 14.21 ± 4.68; G2: 8.92 ± 3.02; G3: 10.04 ± 2.37; G4: 12.74 ± 5.15; G5: 10.99 ± 3.35; G6: 6.09 ± 1.84. Data were compared by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. Bond strength recorded after 2-min acid etching was significantly higher than 4-min etching (p<0.05) and control (p<0.05), but did not differ significantlyfrom sandblasting alone (p>0.05) or followed by etching for 2 or 4 min (p>0.05). Within the limitations of an in vitro study, it may be concluded that 2-min hydrofluoric acid etching produced a favorable micromechanical retention that enhanced resin cement bond strength to porcelain.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heloísa A. B. Guimarães ◽  
Paula C. Cardoso ◽  
Rafael A. Decurcio ◽  
Lúcio J. E. Monteiro ◽  
Letícia N. de Almeida ◽  
...  

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of resin cement and lithium disilicate ceramic after various surface treatments of the ceramic. Sixty blocks of ceramic (IPS e.max Press, Ivoclar Vivadent) were obtained. After cleaning, they were placed in polyvinyl chloride tubes with acrylic resin. The blocks were divided into six groups (n=10) depending on surface treatment: H/S/A - 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane + Adhesive, H/S -10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane, H/S/UA - 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Silane + Universal Adhesive, H/UA- 10% Hydrofluoric Acid + Universal Adhesive, MBEP/A - Monobond Etch & Prime + Adhesive, and MBEP - Monobond Etch & Prime. The light-cured resin cement (Variolink Esthetic LC, Ivoclar Vivadent) was inserted in a mold placed over the treated area of the ceramics and photocured with an LED for 20 s to produce cylinders (3 mm x 3 mm). The samples were subjected to a shear bond strength test in a universal test machine (Instron 5965) by 0.5 mm/min. ANOVA and Tukey tests showed a statistically significant difference between groups (p<0.05). The results of the shear strength test were H/S/A (9.61±2.50)A, H/S (10.22±3.28)A, H/S/UA (7.39±2.02)ABC, H/UA (4.28±1.32)C, MBEP/A (9.01±1.97)AB, and MBEP (6.18±2.75)BC. The H/S group showed cohesive failures, and the H/UA group was the only one that presented adhesive failures. The conventional treatment with hydrofluoric acid and silane showed the best bond strength. The use of a new ceramic primer associated with adhesive bonding obtained similar results to conventional surface treatment, being a satisfactory alternative to replace the use of hydrofluoric acid.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. e191581
Author(s):  
Fawaz Alqahtani ◽  
Mohammed Alkhurays

Aim: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the effect of different surface treatment and thermocycling on the shear bond strength (SBS) of different dual-/light-cure cements bonding porcelain laminate veneers (PLV). Methods: One hundred and twenty A2 shade lithium disilicate discs were divided into three groups based on the resin cement used and on the pretreatment received and then divided into two subgroups: thermocycling and control. The surface treatment were either micro-etched with aluminium trioxide and 10% hydrofluoric acid or etched with 10% hydrofluoric acid only before cementation. Three dual-cure (Variolink Esthetic (I), RelyX Ultimate (II), and RelyX Unicem (III)) and three light-cure (Variolink Veneer (IV), Variolink Esthetic (V), RelyX Veneer (VI)) resin cements were used for cementation. The SBS of the samples was evaluated and analysed using three -way ANOVA with statistical significant set at α=0.05. Results: For all resin cements tested with different surface treatments, there was a statistically significant difference within resin cements per surface treatment (p<0.05). The shear bond strength in the micro-etch group was significant higher than the acid-etch group (p<0.05) There was statistically significant interaction observed between the surface treatment and thermocycling (p<0.05) as well as the cement and thermocycling(p<0.05). It was observed that the reduction in shear bond strength after thermocycling was more pronounced in the acid etch subgroup as compared to the microetch subgroup. However, the interaction between the three factors: surface treatments, thermocycling and resin cements did not demonstrate statistically significant differences between and within groups (p=0.087). Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study, it acan be concluded that Dual cure resin cements showed a higher Shear bond strength as compared to light cure resin cements. Thermal cycling significantly decreased the shear bond strength for both ceramic surface treatments. After thermocycling, the specimens with 10% HF surface treatment showed lower shear bond strength values when compared to those treated by sandblasting with Al2O3 particles.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amr El-Etreby ◽  
Osama AlShanti ◽  
Gihan El-Nagar

Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of repressing and different surface treatment protocols on the shear bond strength of lithium disilicate glass-ceramics. Material and Methods: A total of 52 lithium disilicate glass-ceramic discs (IPS emax Press, Ivoclar Vivadent) were fabricated using the heat-press technique. The discs were divided into two groups; group (P): discs fabricated from new e.max ingots (n=26), group (R): discs fabricated from reused e.max buttons (n=26). Each group was subdivided into subgroup (E): discs were etched with hydrofluoric acid (9.5%) (n=13), subgroup (S): discs were air-abraded with 110 µm alumina particles. All specimens were subjected to X-ray Diffraction analysis, Scanning Electron Microscope, Energy Dispersive X-Ray, Thermo-Cycling, and Shear Bond Strength Testing. Results: Repressed Etched subgroup (RE) recorded the statistically highest shear bond strength value, followed by the Pressed Etched subgroup (PE), while the statistically lowest shear bond strength value was recorded for the Pressed Air-Abraded subgroup (PS) and Repressed Air-Abraded subgroup (RS). Conclusion: Repressing the leftover buttons for the construction of new lithium disilicate glass-ceramic restorations has no adverse effect on the bond strength of the resin cement to the ceramic. Hydrofluoric acid surface treatment improves the shear bond strength and durability of resin cement bond to both pressed and repressed lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. Air-abrasion cannot be considered as a reliable surface treatment when bonding to lithium disilicate glass-ceramics. Keywords Heat pressed; Lithium disilicate glass-ceramics; Repressing; Shear bond strength; Surface treatment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinar Cevik ◽  
Oguz Eraslan ◽  
Kursat Eser ◽  
Suleyman Tekeli

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of six different surface conditioning methods on the shear bond strength of ceramic brackets bonded to feldspathic porcelain. Materials and methods: A total of 60 feldspathic porcelain disks were fabricated and divided into six subgroups including 10 specimens in each. Specimens were first treated one of the following surface conditioning methods, namely, 37% phosphoric acid (G-H3PO4), 9.4% hydrofluoric acid (G-HF), grinding with diamond burs (G-Grinding), Nd:YAG laser (G-Nd:YAG), Airborne-particle abrasion (G-Abrasion). Specimens were also coated with silane without surface treatment for comparison (G-Untreated). A total of 60 ceramic brackets were bonded to porcelain surfaces with a composite resin and then subjected to thermocycling 2500× between 5°C and 55°C. The shear bond strength test was carried out using a universal testing device at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Failure types were classified according to the adhesive remnant index. Analysis of variance and Tukey tests were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Microstructure of untreated and surface-treated specimens was investigated by scanning electron microscopy. Results: Using G-Abrasion specimens resulted in the highest shear bond strength value of 8.58 MPa for feldspathic porcelain. However, the other specimens showed lower values: G-Grinding (6.51 MPa), G-Nd:YAG laser (3.37 MPa), G-HF (2.71 MPa), G-H3PO4 (1.17 MPa), and G-Untreated (0.93 MPa). Conclusion: Airborne-particle abrasion and grinding can be used as surface treatment techniques on the porcelain surface for a durable bond strength. Hydrofluoric acid and phosphoric acid etching methods were not convenient as surface treatment methods for the feldspathic porcelain.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahd Taha Mandil ◽  
Hesham Katamish ◽  
Tarek Salah

Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser on the shear bond strength (SBS) and surface topography of two CAD/CAM ceramic materials bonded with self-adhesive resin cement. Material and methods: sixty ceramic CAD/CAM discs were obtained, 30 lithium disilicate (IPS Emax) and 30 hybrid resin ceramic (Vita Enamic). The Slices were allocated into six groups (n=10) according to ceramic material and surface treatment; Group (LD-C): IPS Emax treated with 9% hydrofluoric acid(HF), Groups (LD-P1) and (LD-P2): IPS Emax treated with Er,Cr:YSGG laser with parameters 1.5 W and 2.5 W, respectively. Group (RC-C): Vita Enamic treated with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF), Groups (RC-P1) and (RC-P2): Vita Enamic treated with Er,Cr:YSGG laser with parameters 1.5 W and 2.5 W, respectively. All samples were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement and thermocycled for 5000 cycles. The SBS was measured using a universal testing machine and the mean values (MPa) were analyzed using Two-way (ANOVA) (P ≤ 0.05) and Bonferroni’s post-hoc test. Results: RC-C (16.55) showed highest SBS followed by LD-C (13.79), which revealed no statistically significant difference with RC-P1 (12.33) and RC-P2 (11.2). The lowest SBS values were found with LD-P1 (2.7) and LD-P2 (2.1). SEM analysis revealed Vita Enamic to have the highest surface roughness. Fracture pattern analysis showed adhesive failure with IPS Emax groups and mixed failure with Vita Enamic groups. Conclusion: Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation with the parameters used did not increase SBS of IPS Emax and Vita Enamic with composite resin compared to HF acid etching.KeywordsEr,Cr:YSGG laser; Shear bond strength; Surface treatment; Ceramic materials.


2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 132-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Minami Kussano ◽  
Gerson Bonfante ◽  
José Gilmar Batista ◽  
João Henrique Nogueira Pinto

This study evaluated the shear bond strength of porcelain/composite using 40 metal + porcelain + composite cylindrical specimens divided into 4 groups, according to porcelain surface treatment: 1) no treatment, 2) mechanical retentions performed with diamond burs, 3) etching with phosphoric acid+silane, and 4) etching with hydrofluoric acid+silane. After being stored in distilled water at room temperature for one week, the specimens were submitted to a shear force (load) and the data were analyzed statistically (ANOVA). The means (in Mpa) of the groups were: 4.71 (group 1); 4.81 (group 2); 11.76 (group 3); 11.07 (group 4). There were no statistically significant differences between groups 1 and 2 and between groups 3 and 4.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document