Effect of Surface Treatment and Resin Cement on Microtensile Bond Strength of Zirconia to Dentin

2014 ◽  
Vol 602-603 ◽  
pp. 602-605
Author(s):  
Xiao Li Feng ◽  
Ruo Yu Liu ◽  
Yan Li Zhang ◽  
Liang Jiao Chen ◽  
Yao Kun Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Silica Coating ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Occlusal Plane ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Relyx Unicem

To evaluate the effect of three surface treatments and two resin cements on microtensile bond strength of zirconia to dentin. Sixty human molars were embedded in acrylic resin and sectioned 3 mm below the occlusal plane. Teeth specimens and sixty zirconia specimens were randomized into 3 groups according to the following surface treatments (n=20): no treatment (control), sandblasting and silane application (SB+SI), sandblasting then silica coating and silane application (SB+SC+SI). In each group, half of the ceramic-tooth assemblies were cemented with PanaviaTM F (Kurary Dental), the rest with RelyX Unicem (3M ESPE). All specimens were cut into microtensile sticks that were loaded in tension until failure. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (α=0.05). The SB+SC+SC group presented higher values than SB+SI and the control group (P<0.05). Bond strength in PanaviaTM F groups were significantly higher than those in RelyX Unicem regardless of the surface treatment (P<0.05). Data indicated that both surface treatment and resin cement have significant effects on bond strength of zirconia to dentin.

scholarly journals Resin Bonding to a Hybrid Ceramic: Effects of Surface Treatments and Aging

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Campos ◽  
CS Almeida ◽  
MP Rippe ◽  
RM de Melo ◽  
LF Valandro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Cont Group ◽  
Hybrid Ceramic

SUMMARY The aim of this study was to verify the effects of different surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength between resin cement and a hybrid ceramic. Thirty-two hybrid ceramic slices (8 × 10 × 3 mm) were produced and allocated among four groups according to the surface treatment: Cont = no treatment, HA = 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 seconds, PA = 37% phosphoric acid applied for 60 seconds and CJ = air abrasion with silica particle coated alumina (Cojet Sand, 3M ESPE, 30 μm/2.8 bar). As a control group, eight blocks of feldspathic ceramic (8 × 10 × 3 mm) were etched by hydrofluoric acid for 60 seconds (VMII). After the surface treatments, the ceramic slices were silanized (except the Cont group) and adhesively cemented to composite resin blocks (8 × 10 × 3 mm ) with a load of 750 g (polymerized for 40 seconds each side). The cemented blocks were cut into beams (bonded surface area of ∼1 mm2). Half of the beams were aged (thermocycling of 5°C-55°C/6000 cycles + water storage at 37°C/60 days), and the other half were tested immediately after being cut. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (non-aged groups) and by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test (aged groups; α=0.05%). The mode of failure was classified by stereomicroscopy. The surface treatment significantly affected the bond strength in each set of groups: non-aged (p=0.001) and aged (p=0.001). Before being aged, samples in the CJ, HA, and PA groups achieved the highest bond strength values. However, after being aged, only those in the HA group remained with the highest bond strength values. Adhesive failure was found most often. In conclusion, hydrofluoric acid etching should be used for surface conditioning of the studied hybrid ceramic.

scholarly journals Surface Treatment Effect on Shear Bond Strength between Lithium Disilicate Glass-Ceramic and Resin Cement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siripan Simasetha ◽  
Awiruth Klaisiri ◽  
Tool Sriamporn ◽  
Kraisorn Sappayatosok ◽  
Niyom Thamrongananskul
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Glass Ceramic ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ceramic Bond

Abstract Objective The study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDGC) and resin cement (RC) using different surface treatments. Materials and Methods LDGC blocks (Vintage LD Press) were prepared, etched with 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, and randomly divided into seven groups (n = 10), depending on the surface treatments. The groups were divided as follows: 1) no surface treatment (control), 2) Silane Primer (KS), 3) Signum Ceramic Bond I (SGI), 4) Signum Ceramic Bond I/Signum Ceramic Bond II (SGI/SGII), 5) experimental silane (EXP), 6) experimental silane/Signum Ceramic Bond II (EXP/SGII), and 7) Experimental/Adper Scotchbond Multi-purpose Adhesive (EXP/ADP). The specimens were cemented to resin composite blocks with resin cement and stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours. The specimens underwent 5,000 thermal cycles and were subjected to the SBS test. Mode of failure was evaluated under the stereo microscope. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed with Welch ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Results The highest mean SBS showed in group EXP/ADP (45.49 ± 3.37 MPa); however, this was not significantly different from group EXP/SGII (41.38 ± 2.17 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). The lowest SBS was shown in the control group (18.36 ± 0.69 MPa). This was not significantly different from group KS (20.17 ± 1.10 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusions The different surface treatments significantly affected the SBS value between LDGC and RC. The application of pure silane coupling agent with or without the application of an adhesive improved the SBS value and bond quality.

scholarly journals Bonding of Y-TZP to Dentin: Effects of Y-TZP Surface Conditioning, Resin Cement Type, and Aging

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
MA Bottino ◽  
C Bergoli ◽  
EG Lima ◽  
SMS Marocho ◽  
RO Souza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Tetragonal Zirconia ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Occlusal Plane ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Tetragonal Zirconia Polycrystal

SUMMARY Purpose To evaluate the effects of two surface treatments, aging, and two resin cements on shear bond strength between dentin and yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal ceramic (Y-TZP). Materials and Methods Eighty human molars were embedded in acrylic resin and sectioned 3 mm below the occlusal plane. These teeth and 80 cylindrical Y-TZP specimens (height, 4 mm; diameter, 3.4 mm) were divided into eight groups (n=10) using the following factors: Y-TZP surface treatment (Vi: low-fusing porcelain [vitrification] + hydrofluoric acid etching + silanization or Si: tribochemical silicatization); cementation strategies (PF: Panavia or CC: Clearfil); and storage (nonaging or aging). Bonding surfaces of 40 Y-TZP specimens received Vi treatment, and the rest received Si treatment. Half of the ceramic-tooth assemblies were cemented with Panavia, the rest with Clearfil. Shear tests were executed using 0.4-mm–thick wire at 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed by three-way analysis of variance and Tukey test (α=0.05). Fractures were analyzed. Results Y-TZP surface treatments did not affect bond strength (p=0.762, Vi = Si), while resin cements (p&lt;0.001, Panavia &gt; Clearfil) and aging (p=0.006, nonaging &gt; aging) showed a significant effect. Most failures were in adhesive at dentin-cement interfaces; no failure occurred between zirconia and cement. Conclusion When Y-TZP ceramic is bonded to dentin, the weakest interface is that between dentin and resin cement. The resin cement/Y-TZP interface was less susceptible to failures, owing to Y-TZP surface treatments.

scholarly journals Effect of Surface Treatment on the Bond Strength of Quartz Fiber-Reinforced Resin Posts to Resin Cements: In Vitro Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Luis A. Herrera-Ocampo DDS, MSD ◽  
Mauricio Montero-Aguilar DDS, MSc ◽  
Erika Alfaro-Mayorga DDS, MSD
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Quartz Fiber ◽  
Fiber Reinforced ◽  
Resin Cements

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength between resin cements and quartz fiber-reinforced resin posts. Materials and methods: Sixty quartz fiber-reinforced resin posts (DT Light-Post™, Bisco™) were randomly divided into 12 experimental groups (n=5), according to the resin cement used (Biscem™ or Duolink™) and the surface treatment: Alcohol (control group), silanized, primer, sandblasted, sandblasted + silanized or sandblasted + primer. Cylindrical resin specimens were obtained using nanohybrid resin. The posts were cemented to the resin discs and push-out tests were conducted. Data were analyzed with ANOVA and T test for averages comparison and the Tukey HSD test with a 95% level of significance. Results: Biscem™ cement generally showed higher bond strength when compared to Duolink™ Significant differences were found between the control group and the sandblasted + silane and sandblasted + primer groups when using Duolink™cement. With Biscem™ cement, no differences between groups or with the control group were found.. Conclusion: Surface treatments on quartz fiber-reinforced resin poles seem to have no significant effect on the bond strength to resin cements, except when using Duolink™ cement with sandblasted posts and using silane or primer.

scholarly journals EVALUATION OF SHEAR BOND STRENGTH OF DIFFERENT RESIN CEMENTS AFTER ZIRCONIA SURFACE TREATMENTS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeliz Hayran ◽  
Süha Kuşçu ◽  
Işıl SARIKAYA
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Silica Coating ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Cement Type ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Adhesive Resin ◽  
Alumina Particles

Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of different resin cements after zirconia surface treatments. Materials & Methods: A total of 60 zirconia discs (3x7mm) were prepared and divided into 3 main groups according to the surface treatments as control (C), sandblasting (SB), and tribochemical silica coating (TC). Main groups were divided into two subgroups according to two different resin cements were applied. No surface treatment was applied to the samples in C group. 50μm Al2O3 particles were applied to the samples in SB group for 10 s at a distance of 10 mm under 4 atm. TC group were tribochemically coated with alumina particles. Self-adhesive resin (ME) and multi-system dual-cure adhesive resin (NX3) was applied to the subgroups. After cementation, all samples were tested for SBS. SBS values were statistically analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Regardless of the cement type, SBS values of the surface treated samples were statistically different (p <0.001). Group SB was determined as the group with the highest SBS value. This group was followed by Group C and Group TC, respectively. The SBS values of the samples according to the resin cements and surface treatments were statistically significantly different (p<0.001). SBS values of the samples cemented with NX3 resin cement were found to be higher than the samples treated with ME resin cement. Conclusion: SB increased resin bond to zirconia. It is more advantageous to use multi-system dual cure adhesive cements in zirconia cementation.

scholarly journals Effects of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength Between Resin Cement and a New Zirconia-reinforced Lithium Silicate Ceramic

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
TP Sato ◽  
LC Anami ◽  
RM Melo ◽  
LF Valandro ◽  
MA Bottino
Keyword(s):  
Contact Angle ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Lithium Silicate ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Silicate Ceramic

SUMMARY This study evaluated the effects of surface treatments on the bond strength between the new zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic (ZLS) and resin cement. VITA Suprinity blocks were crystallized according to the manufacturer's instructions and randomly assigned to six groups (N=36; n=6), according to the surface treatment to be performed and aging conditions: HF20, 10% hydrofluoric acid for 20 seconds, baseline (control); HF20tc, 10% hydrofluoric acid for 20 seconds, aging; HF40, 10% hydrofluoric acid for 40 seconds, baseline; HF40tc, 10% hydrofluoric acid for 40 seconds, aging; CJ, CoJet sandblasting (25 seconds, 2.5 bar, 15-mm distance), baseline; and CJtc, CoJet sandblasting (25 seconds, 2.5 bar, 15-mm distance), aging. All specimens were silanized (Monobond S) and cemented with Panavia F to newly polymerized Z250 resin blocks. After specimens were immersed for 24 hours in distilled water at 37° C, 1-mm2 cross-section microbars were obtained by means of a cutting machine under constant cooling. Baseline groups were immediately tested, whereas “tc” groups were used to analyze the effect of aging on bond strength (10,000 thermal cycles, 5/55°C, 30-second bath). The microtensile bond strength test was performed with a universal testing machine (0.5 mm/min), and bond strength (MPa) was calculated when the load-to-failure (N) was divided by the adhesive area (mm2). We also evaluated the surface roughness (Sa, average roughness; Str, texture aspect ratio; Sdr, developed interfacial area ratio) and the contact angle resulting from the treatments. Data were statistically analyzed by one- or two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's test (all α=5%). The failure mode of each specimen was evaluated by stereomicroscopy, and representative specimens were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. The microtensile bond strength was affected by the surface conditioning (p&lt;0.0001), storage condition (p&lt;0.0001), and the interaction between them (p=0.0012). The adhesion for HF etching was stable, whereas for CJ, aging significantly damaged the adhesion. Most failures were predominantly adhesive between ceramic and cement (52.6%). The roughness of the treated samples was higher compared with that of polished specimens for the three evaluated parameters (Sa, Str, and Sdr; all p&lt;0.0001). Contact angle was also influenced by treatments (p&lt;0.0001), with the CJ group showing values similar to those of control specimens. It can be concluded that the three surface treatment techniques present favorable immediate results, but silica coating was not effective in maintaining the bond strength over the long term.

Effects of Surface Treatments, Thermocycling, and Cyclic Loading on the Bond Strength of a Resin Cement Bonded to a Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramic

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
GB Guarda ◽  
AB Correr ◽  
LS Gonçalves ◽  
AR Costa ◽  
GA Borges ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Glass Ceramic ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ceramic Surface ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Ceramic Blocks

SUMMARY Objectives The aim of this present study was to investigate the effect of two surface treatments, fatigue and thermocycling, on the microtensile bond strength of a newly introduced lithium disilicate glass ceramic (IPS e.max Press, Ivoclar Vivadent) and a dual-cured resin cement. Methods A total of 18 ceramic blocks (10 mm long × 7 mm wide × 3.0 mm thick) were fabricated and divided into six groups (n=3): groups 1, 2, and 3—air particle abraded for five seconds with 50-μm aluminum oxide particles; groups 4, 5, and 6—acid etched with 10% hydrofluoric acid for 20 seconds. A silane coupling agent was applied onto all specimens and allowed to dry for five seconds, and the ceramic blocks were bonded to a block of composite Tetric N-Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) with RelyX ARC (3M ESPE) resin cement and placed under a 500-g static load for two minutes. The cement excess was removed with a disposable microbrush, and four periods of light activation for 40 seconds each were performed at right angles using an LED curing unit (UltraLume LED 5, Ultradent) with a final 40 second light exposure from the top surface. All of the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. Groups 2 and 5 were submitted to 3,000 thermal cycles between 5°C and 55°C, and groups 3 and 6 were submitted to a fatigue test of 100,000 cycles at 2 Hz. Specimens were sectioned perpendicular to the bonding area to obtain beams with a cross-sectional area of 1 mm2 (30 beams per group) and submitted to a microtensile bond strength test in a testing machine (EZ Test) at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were submitted to analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc test (p≤0.05). Results The microtensile bond strength values (MPa) were 26.9 ± 6.9, 22.2 ± 7.8, and 21.2 ± 9.1 for groups 1–3 and 35.0 ± 9.6, 24.3 ± 8.9, and 23.9 ± 6.3 for groups 4–6. For the control group, fatigue testing and thermocycling produced a predominance of adhesive failures. Fatigue and thermocycling significantly decreased the microtensile bond strength for both ceramic surface treatments when compared with the control groups. Etching with 10% hydrofluoric acid significantly increased the microtensile bond strength for the control group.

The Effect of Different Surface Treatments on Cement-Retained Implant-Supported Restorations

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murat Kurt ◽  
Tolga Külünk ◽  
Çağrı Ural ◽  
Şafak Külünk ◽  
Şengül Danişman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetron Sputtering ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Tensile Force ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Uniaxial Tensile ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Test Machine ◽  
Single Crowns

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of the various surface treatment methods on the retention of single crowns on implant abutments. The study included 50 single crowns that were cemented with adhesive resin cement onto the ITI solid abutments. The specimens were randomly divided into 5 groups, each including 10 specimens according to the following surface treatments: group C, control, abutments remained unaltered as control; group L, etching with CO2 laser; group SB, sandblasting with 50-μm Al2O3; group MS: coating with titanium nitride (TiAlN) with a radiofrequency magnetron sputtering system; and group SP, silicoating by Silano-Pen. After the surface treatment procedures were finished, the casted crowns were cemented onto the abutments, and thermocycling was applied to simulate oral environment. The uniaxial tensile force was applied to all test crowns using a universal test machine (Instron) with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The load required to dislodge each crown was recorded in Newton. The lowest tensile bond strength values were obtained with group MS (223.26 ± 14.30 N) and significantly differ from all other groups except group C. Group SB showed highest test results (506.02 ± 18.04 N) and differs from other groups (P &lt; .05). The test values that were obtained in group MS-group C did not show significant differences (P &gt; .05). Sandblasting is an effective method to increase bond strength. Also, Silano-Pen and laser application is advisable for increasing the crown retention to abutments. Titanium aluminum nitride coating with magnetron sputtering technique seems to be ineffective.

scholarly journals Comparison of Silane Heat Treatment by Laser and Various Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite Resin/Lithium Disilicate

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (24) ◽  
pp. 7808
Author(s):  
Goknil Ergun-Kunt ◽  
Rafat Sasany ◽  
Mehmet Faruk Koca ◽  
Mutlu Özcan
Keyword(s):  
Heat Treatment ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Composite Ceramic ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength

In the current study, we evaluated the effects of heat treatment (by Er:YAG or furnace) and various surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of silanized lithium disilicate ceramic. Seventy lithium disilicate (IPS e. max Press; Ivoclar Vivadent) and composite resin (Tetric N-Ceram; Ivoclar Vivadent) blocks were made and distributed into seven groups (n = 10) at random: S: silanization alone; ALS: airborne particle abrasion (APA) and silanization; SC: APA modified with silica and silanization; SHT1: silanization and heat treatment by Er:YAG; SHT2: silanization and heat treatment performed in the furnace (100 °C, 1 min); HF: etching with HF; and HFS: etching with HF and silanization. Every ceramic specimen was cemented to a composite resin block after surface treatment. Cemented specimens were embedded into acrylic resin and were tested with the μTBS test. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tamhane T2 tests (α = 0.05). The SHT1 group had the highest bond of strength compared to the other groups (27.46 MPa). The ALS group had the lowest strength of the groups (15.56 MPa). Between SHT2 and HFS (p = 1), the comparison of the mean µTBS values showed no significant differences. It was concluded that silane heat treatment increased the resin composite–ceramic bond strength; however, within the terms of μTBS, the Er:YAG laser treatment was more successful than other surface treatment applications.

scholarly journals Effect of two Resin Cements and two Fiber Post Surface Treatments on Push-out Bond Strength between Fiber Post and Root Dentin

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luiz Felipe Valandro ◽  
César Dalmolin Bergoli ◽  
Carolina Ceolin Druck ◽  
Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Fiber Post ◽  
Resin Cements ◽  
Tukey Test ◽  
Root Dentin ◽  
Push Out

ABSTRACT Aim To evaluate the effect of fiber post surface treatments on push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin. Materials and methods Sixty bovine mandibular teeth (N = 60) were sectioned (16 mm), prepared (12 mm), embedded with acrylic resin and then allocated into six groups (n = 10): Gr1- Silane coupling agent (Sil) + Conventional resin cement AllCem (AlC); Gr2- Sil + Conventional resin cement RelyX ARC (ARC); Gr3- tribochemical silica coating (TBS) + AlC; Gr4– TBS + ARC; Gr5- No treatment (NT) + AlC; Gr6– NT+ ARC. Specimens were sectioned in four slices (2 mm) and submitted to push-out test. Fracture analyses were executed at x200. The values of the push-out bond strength were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey test (á = 0.05). Results Resin cement did not affect the bond strength values (p = 0.9674), fiber post surface treatment affected the push-out bond strength (p = 0.0353), interaction between factors did not affected the values (p = 0.338). Tukey test did not show differences between the groups. Adhesive failure between cement and dentin was predominantly. Conclusion The fiber post surface treatment appears have no influence on bond strength between fiber post and root dentin. Clinical significance The tested fiber posts surface treatment appears do not influence the fiber post bond behavior. How to cite this article Druck CC, Bergoli CD, Pereira GKR, Valandro LF. Effect of two Resin Cements and two Fiber Post Surface Treatments on Push-out Bond Strength between Fiber Post and Root Dentin. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(1):7-12.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document