Evaluation of shear bond strength of composite to porcelain according to surface treatment

Effect of Combined Application of Hydrofluoric and Phosphoric Acids and Active Irrigation with a Microbrush on Shear Bond Strength of Lithium Disilicate Ceramics to Enamel

Background

This study assessed the effect of combined application of hydrofluoric (HF) acid and phosphoric acid (PA) and active irrigation (AI) with a microbrush on shear bond strength (SBS) of lithium disilicate (LDS) ceramics to enamel.

Materials and Methods

This in vitro study was conducted on 40 extracted teeth that received enamel preparation with a #12 cylindrical bur. Forty IPS e.max LT rods (3mm diameter, 6mm height) were fabricated and randomly assigned to four groups (n = 10) for surface treatment with 5% HF (group 1), 5% HF and AI with a microbrush for 20 seconds (group 2), 5% HF and 32% PA (group 3), and 5% HF and 32% PA plus AI with a microbrush for 20 seconds (group 4). Silane and Choice 2 cement were used for bonding rods to enamel. The SBS was measured by a universal testing machine. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Bonferroni, and Chi-square tests (alpha = 0.05).

Results

Group 4 had the highest SBS, and group 1 had the lowest SBS (P < 0.05). Group 2 had a significantly higher SBS than group 1, and group 4 had a significantly higher SBS than group 3. AI with a microbrush significantly increased the SBS (P < 0.05), but the application of PA caused no significant change in SBS (P > 0.05). The interaction effect of PA and AI on SBS was not significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The application of PA in addition to 5% HF acid caused no significant change in the SBS of LDS ceramic to enamel. However, AI with a microbrush significantly increased the SBS.

Survival assessment of fractured porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns surface roughened by sandblasted and repaired by composite resin after in vitro thermal fatigue

Background/purpose

Intraoral repair usually takes the convenience of the patient's daily life as the starting point, taking into account the bonding strength, operational feasibility, and safety. This study aimed to evaluate the survival of composite resin by simulating cavity fracture repair in porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) crowns and referring to the G.V. Black classification of caries as ceramic- and metal-site exposure.

Materials and methods

Mechanical sandblast experimental and a nonsandblast control groups comprised 120 samples, and interfacial locking was enhanced through acid etching, bonding, and light-curing composite resin restoration. Classes of VI buccal (B), III mesial (M), and IV mesiobuccal (MB) types, were investigated. Load tests were performed on two sets, with one set at room temperature for 24 h and the other via thermal cycling at 5 °C/50 °C 720 times. Loading was gradually applied to the samples until a maximum of 450 N was reached.

Results

Results showed that 24 h survival rates of B-, M - , and MB-repaired PFM crowns were 88%, 84%, and 88%, respectively. The repaired PFM survival rates for B, M, and MB were 52%, 44%, and 28%, respectively, after thermal cycling and loading tests. Multiple logistic regression and chi-square test (α = 0.05) showed that the regression results of factors affecting survival assessment were only significant between groups after thermal fatigue (P < 0.05). Survival rate of repairing metal-site in the MB model was significantly higher than that of ceramic-sites repairing in non-blasted samples. For the MB cavity model, sandblasting can significantly improve the survival rate of the repair of ceramic parts in the MB model (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our results suggest that sandblasting can be further considered, especially for MB cavity fractures when ceramic-site restorations are required.

Do different protocols affect the success rate or bond strength of glass-ceramics repaired with composite resin? A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Intraoral repair techniques prevent unnecessary replacement of ceramic restorations, thereby increasing the survival rate. However, adhesion between ceramics and the composite resin is challenging and how different protocols influence adhesion is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the influence of different protocols on repairing glass-ceramic surfaces with composite resins.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Embase electronic databases were searched to select studies comparing bond strength values or survival rates of glass-ceramic repaired with composite resins using different surface treatment protocols. No publication year or language restriction was applied. Data sets were extracted from all included studies, and the mean differences calculated. A 95% confidence interval was calculated by using the random effect model (Rev Man 5.4).

RESULTS

The search identified 5037 studies, and 165 were assessed for eligibility. Finally, 123 in vitro studies were included in the systematic review and 48 in the meta-analysis. Considering different glass-ceramics, bond strength tests, and aged or not aged specimens, 37 meta-analyses found the effect of repair protocols: only adhesive, silane plus adhesive alone or preceded by hydrofluoric (HF) acid, airborne-particle abrasion (APA) with Al2O3 particles, silica-coated APA (SCAPA), diamond rotary instrument (DRI), and laser irradiation (LI).

CONCLUSIONS

For feldspathic porcelain, HF acid, APA, SCAPA, or DRI improved the repair micromechanical retention; applying silane is essential to HF-conditioned surfaces but the use of adhesive is optional when silane is applied. Results for leucite and lithium disilicate were inconclusive in terms of suggesting a treatment other than HF acid plus silane and adhesive applications.

Clinical performance of two different adhesive strategies for metal-ceramic cracks repairing and related in vitro study

To evaluate the bonding reliability of a universal adhesive compared to a commercial ceramic repair system for metal-ceramic cracks. In vitro part: sixty specimens with porcelain, metal and porcelain-metal substrate were fabricated. Half specimens were bonded by Singlebond Universal adhesive and Filtek Z350 resin composite. The other were processed by Ceramic Repair N. Shear bond strength was tested. In vivo part: forty patients with sixty ceramic fractured porcelain-fused-metal restorations were involved. Half were repaired by Singlebond Universal and Filtek Z350. The other were restored by Ceramic Repair N. The mean observation period was 65 weeks. Results showed the bond strength ranged from 13.97 MPa to 15.85 MPa using two different repair system on different substrate with no statistical difference. There was no statistical difference between the two adhesive system in survival rate according to Kaplan-Meier analysis. The universal adhesive had a similar repair performance compared to commercial ceramic repair system.

Orthodontic Bonding: Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Patients seeking orthodontic treatment are increasing, and clinicians often have to place brackets on various surfaces aside from enamel. It is crucial to know what materials or instruments are required to bond brackets to each surface.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to serve as a clinical guideline for the safest and most effective approaches taken to condition various surfaces for bonding to orthodontic brackets and provide background knowledge on the subject.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed and EBSCO databases were searched, along with the use of Google Scholar search engine, to obtain relevant articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals, from 1955 to 2020. Keywords used were Shear bond strength; Orthodontic bracket; Base design; Etching; Sandblasting; Laser; Conditioning; Enamel; Ceramic; Porcelain; Gold; Amalgam; Composite.

CONCLUSION

Even though orthophosphoric acid is the most widely used enamel conditioning agent, laser etching should be considered to avoid enamel decalcification. Hydrofluoric acid is the current standard for ceramic conditioning; however, its use intraorally should be minimized due to its toxicity. Orthophosphoric acid, CoJet-Sand air abrasion, and laser etching are viable alternatives for conditioning ceramic. Monobond Etch & Prime is toxic and should not be used intraorally. Composite can be conditioned by bur roughening, and the use of ceramic brackets is recommended. Amalgam and gold surfaces can be conditioned adequately by air abrasion. Despite the claims of many authors, the maximum shear forces that orthodontic brackets are subjected to are not 6-8 mega pascal (MPa). Further investigation is required in that regard. More in vivo studies need to be performed to confirm the in vitro results.

Repair bond strength of resin composite to three aged CAD/CAM blocks using different repair systems

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the repair bond strength of a nanohybrid resin composite to three CAD/CAM blocks using different intraoral ceramic repair systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three CAD/CAM blocks (Lava Ultimate, Cerasmart, and Vitablocks Mark II) were selected for the study. Thirty-two specimens were fabricated from each block. Specimens were randomly divided into eight groups for the following different intraoral repair systems: Group 1: control group (no treatment); Group 2: 34.5% phosphoric acid etching; Group 3: CoJet System; Group 4: Z-Prime Plus System; Group 5: GC Repair System; Group 6: Cimara System; Group 7: Porcelain Repair System; and Group 8: Clearfil Repair System. Then, nanohybrid resin composite (Tetric Evo Ceram) was packed onto treated blocks surfaces. The specimens were thermocycled before application of repair systems and after application of composite resin. After second thermal cycling, blocks were cut into bars (1 × 1 × 12 mm³) for microtensile bond strength tests. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test (α=.05).

RESULTS

Cimara System, Porcelain Repair, and Clearfil Repair systems significantly increased the bond strength of nanohybrid resin composite to all CAD/CAM blocks when compared with the other tested repair systems (P<.05). In terms of CAD/CAM blocks, the lowest values were observed in Vitablocks Mark II groups (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

All repair systems used in the study exhibited clinically acceptable bond strength and can be recommended for clinical use.

Shear Bond Strength of Nanohybrid Composite to the Resin Matrix Ceramics After Different Surface Treatments

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) of a composite resin to the various resin matrix ceramics (RMC).

BACKGROUND

Clinical applications of physical and chemical surface conditioning methods may be required for RMC to optimize the adhesion of additional resin materials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-nine RMC specimens (6 × 6 × 2 mm) were prepared from a resin nanoceramic (RNC), a polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic (PIHC), and a flexible hybrid ceramic (FHC) block with a cutting machine under copious water. All specimens divided randomly into three surface treatment subgroups (n = 11): (1) untreated (Cnt), (2) tribochemical silica coated (Tbc), and (3) neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser irradiated with 3 W (150 mJ/pulse, 20 Hz) for 20 sec. A nanohybrid composite resin was layered with a disc-shape mold (2 × 3 mm) onto the ceramics and submitted to thermal cycling (3000 cycles, 5-55°C). The SBS test of specimens was performed using a universal testing machine. Data were statistically analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The type of RMC, surface treatments, and their interactions was statistically significant on SBS, according to the ANOVA (p < 0.05). Both the Tbc and Lsr surface treatments significantly increased the SBS values of FHC (p < 0.001), while significant increases were observed only for Lsr0applied RNC and Tbc applied PIHC groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The tribochemical silica coating and laser irradiation techniques may be suitable for improving the surface topography of specific types of RMC. While the same surface treatment technique may not provide similar successful results for all types of RMC, it is recommended to choose the most effective and reliable technique for clinical application.

Effect of Silane Heat Treatment by Laser on the Bond Strength of a Repair Composite to Feldspathic Porcelain

PURPOSE

Ceramic restoration fracture may occur in the oral cavity. Intraoral repair of fractured porcelain could be advantageous to both patient and dentist. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of heat treatment of the silane coupling agent by Er:YAG and CO₂ lasers on the microshear bond strength of a repair composite to feldspathic porcelain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty ceramic blocks were prepared and randomly divided into six groups (n = 10): (i) HF + silane (HS); (ii) silane + CO₂ laser (SC); (iii) CO₂ laser + silane (CS); (iv) silane + Er:YAG laser (SE); (v) Er:YAG laser + silane (ES); (vi) bur + HF + silane (BuHS). An adhesive resin was applied to the prepared ceramic surfaces and light-cured. Two transparent plastic tubes were placed perpendicularly to each ceramic block. The composite resin was then placed on the treated ceramic surface and light-cured for 40 seconds. The bonded blocks were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours and subjected to 3000 thermocycles. Microshear bond strength (μSBS) tests were performed using a wire and loop method. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range tests (p ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

The comparison of the mean μSBS values showed no significant differences between the ES and HS groups (p = 0.914). On the other hand, the specimens in these groups exhibited significantly higher bond strengths than those in the other groups (p < 0.01). The mean μSBS of the BuHS group was statistically similar to that of CS and SE groups (p > 0.05). The μSBS for the SC group was significantly lower than that of the other groups (p < 0.01), with the exception of the CS group (p = 0.674).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with Er:YAG laser prior to silane application can be as effective as HF etching. Heat treatment of silane by CO₂ or Er:YAG lasers does not improve the bond strength between feldspathic porcelain and composite resin.

The Bond Strength of Nanohybrid and Nanoceramic Composites to Feldspathic Porcelain

Background:

Porcelain fracture is the most important problem in fixed prosthetic restorations. The replacement of fractured restoraions isn’t often prefer by patients and dentists. Intraoral repair of fractured porcelain is a big alternative for patient and dentist. For this reason, dentists try to improve different surface treatments to increase the bond strength between porcelain and repair materials such as composite resins.

Aims:

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of nano-hybrid (Nh.com) and nano-ceramic composite resins (Nc.com) to this feldspathic porcelains (Vita and Ivoclar).

Settings and Design:

120 ceramic disc were fabricated from feldspathic porcelain.

Materials and Methods:

The following surface treatment was applied on the ceramic surface: 1) Hydrofluoric acid+silane, 2) Air-abrasion+silane, 3) Air-abrasion=Control group. Nh.com and Nc.com was placed on the porcelain surface. Half of the specimens were stored in 37 ± 2oC distilled water and another half were subjected to thermocycling before SBS. The samples placed in an universal testing machine and applied shear force until seperation occured.

Statistical Analysis Used:

The data were analyzed by multi-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan test (P <0.05).

Results:

The results show that Ivoclar and Vita had almost equal fracture values. Nh.com showed high bond strength than Nc.com. In the Ivoclar porcelain, hydrofluoric acid etching had highest fracture values than other surface treatments, and in the vita porcelain air-abrasion had a little difference from hydrofluoric acid etching.

Conclusions:

Different surface treatments show different effect on SBS between feldspathic porcelain and composite resins.

Bond strength of composite resin to white mineral trioxide aggregate: Effect of different surface treatments

Background:

The main aim of restorative dentistry is to restore and preserve dental health with the use of appropriate restorative modalities to protect the pulp and restore its function. This study compared the effect of different surface treatments of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) on the bond strength of composite resin to MTA.

Materials and Methods:

Forty cylindrical acrylic blocks with a hole were prepared and filled by ProRoot MTA. The samples were assigned to four groups: Group 1 – no surface treatment; Group 2 – phosphoric acid etching; Group 3 – sandblasting; and Group 4 – hydrofluoric acid (HF) etching, rinsing, and silane application. OptiBond Solo Plus adhesive was utilized in all the groups. Then, composite resin cylinders were bonded to sample surfaces. The samples were thermocycled and tested for microshear bond strength using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Data were analyzed with Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests. Scanning electron microscopy images were prepared for each study group after surface treatments.

Results:

Means and standard deviations of bond strength values in study groups 1–4 were 14.83 ± 7.76, 21.85 ±7.99, 6.48 ± 3.89, and 26.01 ± 11.09 Mpa, respectively.

Conclusions:

Within the limitations of this study, phosphoric acid etching or HF etching plus silanization was preferred to surface treatment of MTA before composite resin bonding.

Effects of different ceramic primers and surface treatments on the shear bond strength of restorative composite resin to zirconium

Background and aims

Data are limited about the effect of ceramic primers on the bond of zirconia to restorative resin composite. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of different surface treatments and two ceramic primers on shear bond strength (SBS) of zirconia to restorative resin composite.

Materials and methods

100 samples of zirconium ceramic blocks were randomly divided into 5 groups (n = 20) and received the following surface treatments: a)Control groupb)AL₂O₃ abrasionc)Nd:YAG laserd)Er:YAG lasere)Bur preparation.Next, each group was divided into two subgroups of 20. In ten out of 20 specimens in each group, monobond plus and Tetric ceram composite resin were applied on the surface. ZPrime Plus and Elite composite were applied on the surfaces of the remaining 10 specimens in each group. Samples were then subjected to shear bond strength test in a universal testing machine until fracture. The mean SBS were calculated and statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA and T-Test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

In ZPrime plus subgroups, diamond bur yielded the highest bond strength. Laser groups showed no significant difference with the control group. In monobond plus subgroups, SBS of air abrasion and diamond bur subgroups was highest and Nd:YAG laser showed the lowest SBS. The lowest bond strength belonged to the Nd:YAG laser subgroup of monobond plus group.

Conclusions

Type of surface preparation significantly affected the bond strength.

Comparison of traditional and simplified methods for repairing CAD/CAM feldspathic ceramics

PURPOSE

To evaluate the adhesion to CAD/CAM feldspathic blocks by failure analysis and shear bond strength test (SBSt) of different restorative systems and different surface treatments, for purpose of moderate chipping repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A self-adhering flowable composite (Vertise Flow, Kerr) containing bi-functional phosphate monomers and a conventional flowable resin composite (Premise Flow, Kerr) applied with and without adhesive system (Optibond Solo Plus, Kerr) were combined with three different surface treatments (Hydrofluoric Acid Etching, Sandblasting, combination of both) for repairing feldspathic ceramics. Two commercial systems for ceramic repairing were tested as controls (Porcelain Repair Kit, Ultradent, and CoJet System, 3M). SBSt was performed and failure mode was evaluated using a digital microscope. A One-Way ANOVA (Tukey test for post hoc) was applied to the SBSt data and the Fisher's Exact Test was applied to the failure analysis data.

RESULTS

The use of resin systems containing bi-functional phosphate monomers combined with hydrofluoric acid etching of the ceramic surface gave the highest values in terms of bond strength and of more favorable failure modalities.

CONCLUSION

The simplified repairing method based on self-adhering flowable resin combined with the use of hydrofluoric acid etching showed high bond strength values and a favorable failure mode. Repairing of ceramic chipping with a self-adhering flowable resin associated with hydrofluoric acid etching showed high bond strength with a less time consuming and technique-sensitive procedure compared to standard procedure.

Shear bond strength of brackets bonded to porcelain surface: in vitro study

Purpose:

To compare the effects of different porcelain surface treatment methods on the shear bond strength (SBS) and fracture mode of orthodontic brackets.

Materials and Methods:

Seventy feldspathic porcelain disk samples mounted in acrylic resin blocks were divided into seven groups (n=10) according to type of surface treatment: I, Diamond bur; II, Orthosphoric acid (OPA); III, hydrofluoric acid (HFA); IV, sandblasted with aluminum oxide (SB); V, SB+HFA; VI, Neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser; VII, Erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser. Brackets were affixed to treated all-porcelain surfaces with a silane bonding agent and adhesive resin and subjected to SBS testing. Specimens were evaluated according to the adhesive remnant index (ARI), and failure modes were assessed quantitatively under a stereomicroscope and morphologically under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance and the post-hoc Tukey test, with the significance level set at 0.05.

Results:

The highest SBS values were observed for Group V, with no significant difference between Groups V and III. SBS values for Group I were significantly lower than those of all other groups tested. The porcelain/resin interface was the most common site of failure in Group V (40%) and Group III (30%), whereas other groups showed various types of bond failure, with no specific location pre-dominating, but with some of the adhesive left on the porcelain surfaces (ARI scores 2 or 3) in most cases.

Conclusion:

The current findings indicate that a diamond bur alone is unable to sufficiently etch porcelain surfaces for bracket bonding. Moreover, SB and HFA etching used in combination results in a significantly higher shear-bond strength than HFA or SB alone. Finally, laser etching with either an Nd:YAG or Er:YAG laser was found to be more effective and less time-consuming than both HFA acid and SB for the treatment of deglazed feldspathic porcelain.

Shear Bond Strengths of Methacrylate- and Silorane-based Composite Resins to Feldspathic Porcelain using Different Adhesive Systems

Background and aims. Use of porcelain as inlays, laminates and metal-ceramic and all-ceramic crowns is common in modern dentistry. The high cost of ceramic restorations, time limitations and difficulty of removing these restorations result in delays in replacing fractured restorations; therefore, their repair is indicated. The aim of the present study was to compare the shear bond strengths of two types of composite resins (methacrylate-based and silorane-based) to porcelain, using three adhesive types.

Materials and methods. A total of 156 samples of feldspathic porcelain surfaces were prepared with air-abrasion and randomly divided into 6 groups (n=26). In groups 1-3, Z250 composite resin was used to repair porcelain samples with Ad-per Single Bond 2 (ASB), Clearfil SE Bond (CSB) and Silorane Adhesive (SA) as the bonding systems, afterapplication of silane, respectively. In groups 4-6, the same adhesives were used in the same manner with Filtek Silorane composite resin. Finally, the shear bond strengths of the samples were measured. Two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests were used to compare bond strengths between the groups with different adhesives at P<0.05.

Results. There were significant differences in the mean bond strength values in terms of the adhesive type (P<0.001). In addition, the interactive effect of the adhesive type and composite resin type had no significant effect on bond strength (P=0.602).

Conclusion. The results of the present study showed the highest repair bond strength values to porcelain with both composite resin types with the application of SA and ASB.

Effect of different temporary crown materials and surface roughening methods on the shear bond strengths of orthodontic brackets

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different temporary crown materials (TCMs) and surface roughening methods on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets.

BACKGROUND DATA

TCMs are widely used during orthodontic treatment in teeth in need of prosthetic treatment, to prevent damage to the final restoration. However, there is no consensus considering the best method for roughening of the surface of TCMs.

METHODS

Five different TCMs [Dentalon Plus-(D), Basworth Trim II-(B), Voco Structure Premium-(V), 3M ESPE Protempt 4-(P), and Revotek LC-(R)] were used in this study. Different surface roughening methods (37% phosphoric acid, sandblasting, and Er:YAG laser) were employed in three subgroups (n=20). The SBS test was used to assess the durability of all groups. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis was performed on a representative specimen in each group.

RESULTS

The highest mean SBS value was observed in group V, followed by groups D and P, regardless of the surface treatment. The lowest SBS values were observed in group B. The laser-irradiated groups had higher SBS values than the sandblasted and acid-etched groups. Furthermore, a significant difference in SBS values was observed between the laser-irradiated group V and all other groups (p<0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of the chemical nature of TCMs on the SBS values appeared to be clinically negligible, whereas the type of surface treatments had a significant influence on bond strengths. Er:YAG laser irradiation caused a significant increase in bond strength between the TCMs and orthodontic brackets.

An in vitro comparison of four intra-oral ceramic repair systems

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the effect of different surface conditioning methods on the tensile bond strength (TBS) and integrity of the leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (Cerana(®) inserts)-resin composite interface, using four commercially available ceramic repair systems.

METHODS

Two hundred extra-large Cerana(®) inserts were mechanically treated and stored in artificial saliva for 3 weeks and subsequently randomly assigned to one of the following ceramic repair systems (n=40/group): Group 1, Ceramic Repair(®) (Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein); Group 2, Cimara(®) (Voco, Germany); Group 3, Clearfil Repair(®) (Kuraray, Japan); Group 4, CoJet system(®) (3M ESPE, Germany); and Group 5, no surface conditioning and no adhesive system applied: the control group. Subsequently, resin composite material was added to the substrate surfaces and the ceramic-resin composite specimens were subjected to TBS testing. Representative samples from the test groups were subjected to scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to determine the mode of failure. The data were analysed statistically using a one-way multivariate analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis test at a 95% confidence interval level.

RESULTS

Surface conditioning with the CoJet(®) system resulted in significantly higher bond strength values (5.2 ± 1.1 MPa) than surface conditioning with the other repair systems (p=0.03). The SEM examination of the failed interfaces revealed that all the specimens examined failed adhesively.

SIGNIFICANCE

Whilst highest bond strength values were observed with the CoJet(®) system all tested repair systems resulted in relatively weak TBS values and, as a consequence, these repair systems may be indicated only as interim measures.

Effect of filler ratio in adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of resin composite to porcelains

This in vitro study evaluated the effect of six different adhesive systems on the shear bond strength of resin composite to feldspathic and low-fusing porcelains. Sixty porcelain blocks were prepared for each low-fusing (Matchmaker) and feldspathic (MVK95) porcelain specimen. After surface preparation, the porcelain specimens were divided into six groups (n = 10) for different adhesive systems (Adper Prompt L-Pop, QuadrantUnil Bond, Te-Econom, PQ1, One-StepPlus and Prime&Bond NT). After adhesive application, a universal resin composite (FiltekZ250) was condensed on the specimens. The prepared specimens were then stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, then all the samples were thermal cycled 1000 times between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. Shear testing was performed on a universal test machine using a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/minute. The statistical analysis of the bond strength data included two-way ANOVA. Then, the means were compared by Tukey HSD test (alpha = 0.05). The lowest bond strength was observed in Adper Prompt L-Pop. No statistically significant difference was observed between One-Step Plus and Prime&Bond NT. The highest bond strength was observed in PQ1. When low-fusing or feldspathic porcelain restorations are repaired with resin composite, self-etching adhesive systems may not be indicated. If maximum bond strength is the goal in porcelain resin bonding, adhesive systems that have a high filler ratio should be used.

Repairing Ceramic Restorations: Final Solution or Alternative Procedure?

This article provides an overview of dental ceramics. It addresses possible modes of failure and factors that may influence the decision to either repair or replace ceramic restorations. The authors' intention was to present ceramic repair as a reliable, low-cost, low-risk technique.

Shear Bond Strength Evaluation of Different Veneering Systems on Ni-Cr Alloys

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of four esthetic veneering materials on nickel-chromium (Ni-Cr) alloy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty square patterns (10 x 10 x 1.5 mm) were cast with Ni-Cr, divided equally into four groups, and received four treatments for veneering: conventional porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM), Artglass, Targis/Vectris, and Biodent light-cured prosthodontic composite resins. After sandblasting of the cast metal surfaces with 50 micro m alumina, the composites were applied to the surfaces according to manufacturers' recommendations. Shear bond strength was determined at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Results were analyzed statistically with Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance and multiple comparison tests.

RESULTS

Mean shear bond strength values were 34.96 MPa for PFM, 14.17 MPa for Targis/Vectris, 13.64 MPa for Artglass, and 10.56 MPa for Biodent. The PFM group exhibited significantly higher bond strength values compared with the other three groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

PFM showed considerably higher shear bond strength values than the three metal-resin bonding techniques.