Micro-shear bond strength of resin cement to dentin after application of desensitizing toothpastes

Bonding CAD/CAM materials with current adhesive systems: An overview

Objective

Data sources

Results

Conclusion

Effect of different resin cements and surface treatments on the shear bond strength of ceramic-glass polymer materials

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The effect of different surface treatment techniques on the bond strength of different types of ceramic-glass polymer computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD-CAM) materials and resin cements after aging is unknown.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the surface roughness of different ceramic-glass polymer CAD-CAM materials after 2 different surface treatments and the effect of material, surface treatment, resin cement, and aging on bond strength. Additionally, it was to determine any correlation between the surface roughness and bond strength.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

CAD-CAM ceramic-glass polymer materials, a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN) (VITA ENAMIC), a resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate), and a nanoparticle-filled resin (Cerasmart) (1.5 mm in thickness; n=144) were divided into 2 subgroups in terms of surface treatments: airborne-particle abraded or silica-coated. The surface roughness values of specimens were measured. Composite resin cylinders were prepared and bonded to the restorative specimens using 2 different types of resin cements (dual-polymerizing [DP] and light-polymerizing [LP]). Half of the specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours, while the other half were submitted to 5000 thermocycles. The shear bond strength was measured, and the failure modes of the specimens were evaluated. The data were analyzed with ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (α=.05). The correlation between roughness and bond strength values was analyzed using Pearson correlation analysis.

RESULTS

Material (P=.012) and surface treatment type (P=.031) significantly affected the surface roughness. For bond strength, significant interactions were found among the material type, surface treatment, resin cement, and aging factors (P=.009). No significant correlation was found between roughness and bond strength (P=.943).

CONCLUSIONS

The surface treatment and resin cement type affected the bond strength and surface roughness of tested restorative materials. DP resin cement provided higher bond strength for airborne-particle abraded nanohybrid composite resin materials. LP resin cement achieved a higher bond strength when used with silica-coated, nanoparticle-filled resin and PICN materials.

Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of hydrofluoric acid treatment on bond strength of resin cements to three different types of ceramic/glass containing CAD-CAM block composite materials.

METHODS

CAD-CAM block materials of polymer infiltrated (Vita Enamic), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate) and nanoceramic (Cerasmart) with a thickness of 1.5mm were randomly divided into two groups according to the surface treatment performed. In Group 1, specimens were wet-ground with silicon carbide abrasive papers up to no. 1000. In Group 2, 9.6% hydrofluoric acid gel was applied to ceramics. Three different resin cements (RelyX, Variolink Esthetic and G-CEM LinkAce) were applied to the tubes in 1.2-mm thick increments and light-cured for 40s using LED light curing unit. Half of the specimens (n=10) were submitted to thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55°C). The strength measurements were accomplished with a universal testing machine (Lloyd Instruments) at a cross-head speed of 0.5mm/min until the failure occurs. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and Tukey's post hoc tests (α=0.05).

RESULTS

There were significant differences between ceramics and resin cements (p<0.001). However, hydrofluoric acid gel treatment had no effect on bond strength values (p=0.073). In addition, thermal cycling significantly decreased bond strength values of resin cements to ceramics (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of appropriate resin cement systems with different ceramic/glass-polymer materials might promote the bonding capacity of these systems.

The Retentive Strength of Cemented Zirconium Oxide Crowns after Dentin Pretreatment with Desensitizing Paste Containing 8% Arginine and Calcium Carbonate

The effect of dentin pretreatment with Desensitizing Paste containing 8% arginine and calcium carbonate on the retention of zirconium oxide (Y-TZP) crowns was tested. Forty molar teeth were mounted and prepared using a standardized protocol. Y-TZP crowns were produced using computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology. The 40 prepared teeth were either pretreated with Desensitizing Paste or not pretreated. After two weeks, each group was subdivided into two groups, cemented with either Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) or Self Adhesive Resin Cement (SARC)). Prior to cementation, the surface areas of the prepared teeth were measured. After aging, the cemented crown-tooth assemblies were tested for retentive strength using a universal testing machine. The debonded surfaces of the teeth and crowns were examined microscopically at 10× magnification. Pretreating the dentin surfaces with Desensitizing Paste prior to cementation did not affect the retention of the Y-TZP crowns. The retentive values for RMGIC (3.04 ± 0.77 MPa) were significantly higher than those for SARC (2.28 ± 0.58 MPa). The predominant failure modes for the RMGIC and SARC were adhesive cement-dentin and adhesive cement-crown, respectively. An 8.0% arginine and calcium carbonate in-office desensitizing paste can be safely used to reduce post-cementation sensitivity without reducing the retentive strength of Y-TZP crowns.