Effect of surface treatments on the resin bond to zirconium-based ceramic

PURPOSE: This study tested the hypothesis that the tribochemical silica coating on ceramic surfaces increases the bond strength of resin cement to a glass-infiltrated zirconium-based ceramic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen blocks of In-Ceram Zirconia from CEREC InLab (5 per group) and 15 composite blocks (Z-250) 5 mm x 5 mm x 4 mm were made. The ceramic surfaces were polished, and the blocks were divided into three groups: (1) airborne abrasion with 110-microm aluminum oxide particles; (2) Rocatec system, tribochemical silica coating; and (3) CoJet system, tribochemical silica coating. The ceramic blocks were cemented to the composite blocks using Panavia F according to the manufacturer's specifications. All samples were stored in 37 degrees C distilled water for 7 days and later sectioned in two axes using a diamond disk under cooling to obtain specimens with a cross-sectional area of approximately 1 mm2 (n = 45). Each specimen was then attached with cyanoacrylate glue to an adapted device for the microtensile test, which was carried out on a universal testing machine. RESULTS: The results were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey's test. Group 2 (23.0+/-6.7 MPa) and group 3 (26.8+/-7.4 MPa) showed greater bond strength than group 1 (15.1+/-5.3 MPa). There was no significant difference between groups 2 and 3. All failures were in the adhesive zone. CONCLUSION: The hypothesis was confirmed--the tribochemical systems increased the bond strength between Panavia F and In-Ceram Zirconia.     

Effect of surface treatment of a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic on the microtensile bond strength

This study evaluated the microtensile bond strength of a resin composite to a ceramic submitted to three surface treatments. Twelve glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic blocks (In-Ceram Alumina, VITA) and twelve resin composite blocks (Clearfil APX, Kuraray) with dimensions of 6mm x 6mm x 5mm were made. The surface of the ceramic was wet-grounded with # 600, 800 and 1200-grid sandpaper, and the blocks were divided in three groups: Group 1 - sandblasting with aluminum oxide - particles 110mm (Micro-Etcher, Danville); Group 2 - Rocatec System (ESPE): Tribochemical silica coating (Rocatec pre-powder + Rocatec-Plus powder + Rocatec-Sil); Group 3 - CoJet System (3M/ESPE): silica coating (silica oxide + ESPE-Sil). The ceramic blocks were cemented to the resin composite blocks with Panavia F (Kuraray Co), following the manufacturer's instructions, under load of 750g for 10min. The samples were stored (distilled water / 7 days / 37O C) and sectioned in two axis, x and y, with diamond disk under cooling in order to obtain samples (S) with 0.6 ± 0.1mm2 of adhesive area (n=36). The S were attached in adapted device for the microtensile test that was performed at an universal testing machine (EMIC), at a speed of 1mm/min. The results (MPa) were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<0.05): G1 - 15.36; G2 - 30.98; G3 - 31.25. Groups 2 (Rocatec) and 3 (CoJet) presented larger bond strength than group 1. There was no statistical difference between group 2 and group 3.     

Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to glass infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic: the effect of surface conditioning.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of three surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin cement to a glass-infiltrated zirconia-reinforced alumina-based core ceramic. METHODS: Thirty blocks (5 x 5 x 4 mm) of In-Ceram Zirconia ceramics (In-Ceram Zirconia-INC-ZR, VITA) were fabricated according to the manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in resin composite. The specimens were polished and assigned to one of the following three treatment conditions (n=10): (1) Airborne particle abrasion with 110 microm Al(2)O(3) particles + silanization, (2) Silica coating with 110 microm SiO(x) particles (Rocatec Pre and Plus, 3M ESPE) + silanization, (3) Silica coating with 30 microm SiO(x) particles (CoJet, 3M ESPE) + silanization. The ceramic-composite blocks were cemented with the resin cement (Panavia F) and stored at 37 degrees C in distilled water for 7 days prior to bond tests. The blocks were cut under coolant water to produce bar specimens with a bonding area of approximately 0.6mm(2). The bond strength tests were performed in a universal testing machine (cross-head speed: 1mm/min). The mean bond strengths of the specimens of each block were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha相似文献   

The effect of ceramic surface treatment on bonding to densely sintered alumina ceramic

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Ceramic surface treatment is crucial for bonding to resin. High crystalline ceramics are poorly conditioned using traditional procedures. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of silica coating on a densely sintered alumina ceramic relative to its bond strength to composite, using a resin luting agent. Material and methods Blocks (6 x 6 x 5 mm) of ceramic and composite were made. The ceramic (Procera AllCeram) surfaces were polished, and the blocks were divided into 3 groups (n = 5): SB, airborne-particle abrasion with 110-microm Al 2 O 3 ; RS, silica coating using Rocatec System; and CS, silica coating using CoJet System. The treated ceramic blocks were luted to the composite (W3D Master) blocks using a resin luting agent (Panavia F). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 7 days and then cut in 2 axes, x and y, to obtain specimens with a bonding area of approximately 0.6 mm 2 (n = 30). The specimens were loaded to failure in tension in a universal testing machine, and data were statistically analyzed using a randomized complete block design analysis of variance and Tukey's test (alpha=.05). Fractured surfaces were examined using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy to determine the type of failure. Energy-dispersive spectroscopy was used for surface compositional analysis. RESULTS: Mean bond strength values (MPa) of Groups RS (17.1 +/- 3.9) ( P =.00015) and CS (18.5 +/- 4.7) ( P =.00012) were significantly higher than the values of Group SB (12.7 +/- 2.6). There was no statistical difference between Groups RS and CS. All failures occurred at the adhesive zone. CONCLUSION: Tribochemical silica coating systems increased the tensile bond strength values between Panavia F and Procera AllCeram ceramic.     

Influence of ceramic surface conditioning and resin cements on microtensile bond strength to a glass ceramic

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: It is not clear how different glass ceramic surface pretreatments influence the bonding capacity of various luting agents to these surfaces. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (microTBS) of 3 resin cements to a lithia disilicate-based ceramic submitted to 2 surface conditioning treatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen 5 x 6 x 8-mm ceramic (IPS Empress 2) blocks were fabricated according to manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in composite resin (Tetric Ceram). Ceramic blocks were polished and divided into 2 groups (n=9/treatment): no conditioning (no-conditioning/control), or 5% hydrofluoric acid etching for 20 seconds and silanization for 1 minute (HF + SIL). Ceramic blocks were cemented to the composite resin blocks with 1 self-adhesive universal resin cement (RelyX Unicem) or 1 of 2 resin-based luting agents (Multilink or Panavia F), according to the manufacturer's instructions. The composite resin-ceramic blocks were stored in humidity at 37 degrees C for 7 days and serially sectioned to produce 25 beam specimens per group with a 1.0-mm(2) cross-sectional area. Specimens were thermal cycled (5000 cycles, 5 degrees C-55 degrees C) and tested in tension at 1 mm/min. Microtensile bond strength data (MPa) were analyzed by 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparisons tests (alpha=.05). Fractured specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope (x40) and classified as adhesive, mixed, or cohesive. RESULTS: The surface conditioning factor was significant (HF+SIL > no-conditioning) (P<.0001). Considering the unconditioned groups, the microTBS of RelyX Unicem was significantly higher (9.6 +/- 1.9) than that of Multilink (6.2 +/- 1.2) and Panavia F (7.4 +/- 1.9). Previous etching and silanization yielded statistically higher microTBS values for RelyX Unicem (18.8 +/- 3.5) and Multilink (17.4 +/- 3.0) when compared to Panavia F (15.7 +/- 3.8). Spontaneous debonding after thermal cycling was detected when luting agents were applied to untreated ceramic surfaces. CONCLUSION: Etching and silanization treatments appear to be crucial for resin bonding to a lithia disilicate-based ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used.     

Resin microtensile bond strength to feldspathic ceramic: hydrofluoric acid etching vs. tribochemical silica coating

This study aimed to compare the microtensile bond strength of resin cement to alumina-reinforced feldspathic ceramic submitted to acid etching or chairside tribochemical silica coating. Ten blocks of Vitadur-alpha were randomly divided into 2 groups according to conditioning method: (1) etching with 9.6% hydrofluoric acid or (2) chairside tribochemical silica coating. Each ceramic block was luted to the corresponding resin composite block with the resin cement (Panavia F). Next, bar specimens were produced for microtensile testing. No significant difference was observed between the 2 experimental groups (Student ttest, P > .05). Both surface treatments showed similar microtensile bond strength values.     

Effect of thermocycling on the bond strength of a glass-infiltrated ceramic and a resin luting cement

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of thermocycling on the bond strength between the surface of the glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic In-Ceram (VITA) and the Panavia F resin cement (Kuraray CO.). Four 5x6x6mm In-Ceram blocks were obtained. One of the 6x6mm faces of each block was conditioned with Cojet - System (tribochemical silica coating, ESPE-3M) and then luted under a constant 750g pressure with Panavia F cement to another identical face of a resin composit block (Clearfil AP-X, Kuraray) obtained by reproduction of the ceramic one from Express (3M) addition curing silicone impressions. The four sets so formed by ceramic, luting cement and resin have been each one serially sectioned in 20 sticks so that the adhesive surface in each presented 1mm2 of area. The samples were divided in 2 groups (n=10): G1- stored for 7 days in deionized water at 36 ± 2oC; G2 - thermocycled 1500 times between 5 and 55oC dwell times. The microtensile tests were accomplished in an universal testing machine (EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 0,5 mm/min. The results showed that the mean tensile bond strength values (MPa) for the group G2: (22,815 ± 5,254) had not statistically differ of the values of group G1: (25,628 ± 3,353) (t = 1,427; gl = 18; p-value = 0,171), at the level of a= 5%. It can be concluded that the thermocycling technique used in the present experiment had not produced statistically significant differences between the bond strength results of the specimens obtained by the two used techniques.     

Influence of silane heat treatment on bond strength of resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic

This study evaluated the influence of heat treatment (HT) of the silane on the microtensile bond strength of resin cement to a feldspathic ceramic. Ceramic (VITA VM7) and composite blocks (N=32) were divided into four groups (n=6 for bond test, n=2 for SEM) at random and subject to following sequence of conditioning: G1: HF 9.6%+Silane+Panavia F2.0, G2: HF 9.6%+Silane+HT+Panavia F2.0, G3: Silane+HT+Panavia F2.0, and G4: Silane+Panavia F2.0. HT was performed in an oven (100°C, 2 minutes). G1 (17.6±2.3 MPa) and G2 (19±3.2 MPa) showed significantly higher mean bond strength than those of G3 (9.1±2.8 MPa) and G4 (10.9±1.8 MPa). SEM analysis showed exclusively mixed failures. Silane HT did not increase the bond strength.     

Fatigue resistance of the bond of a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic to human dentin

PURPOSE: To evaluate the fatigue resistance of the bond between dentin and glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic, using different luting protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The null hypothesis is that the fatigue resistance varies with the luting strategy. Forty blocks of In-Ceram Alumina were prepared, and one surface of each block was abraded with 110-microm aluminum oxide particles. Then, the blocks were luted to flat dentin surfaces of 40 human third molars, using 4 different luting strategies (luting system [LS]/ceramic surface conditioning [CSC]) (n=10): (G1) [LS] RelyX-Unicem/[CSC] airborne abrasion with 110-microm Al2O3 particles; (G2) [LS] One-Step + Duo-Link (bis-GMA-based resin)/[CSC] etching with 4% hydrofluoric acid + silane agent; (G3) [LS] ED-Primer + Panavia F (MDP-based resin)/[CSC] Al2O3; (G4) [LS] Scotchbond1+RelyX-ARC (bis-GMA-based resin)/[CSC] chairside tribochemical silica coating (air abrasion with 30-microm SiOx particles + silane). After 24 h of water storage at 37 degrees C, the specimens were subjected to 106 fatigue cycles in shear with a sinusoidal load (0 to 21 N, 8 Hz frequency, 37 degrees C water). A fatigue survivor score was given, considering the number of the fatigue cycles until fracture. The failure modes of failed specimens were observed in a SEM. RESULTS: G3 (score = 5.9, 1 failure) and G4 (score = 6, no failures) were statistically similar (p = 0.33) and had significantly higher fatigue resistance than G1 (score = 3.9, 5 failures) and G2 (score = 3.7, 6 failures) (p < 0.03). SEM analysis of fractured specimens of G1 and G2 showed that almost all the failures were between ceramic and cement. CONCLUSION: The MDP-based resin cement + sandblasting with Al2O3 particles (G3) and bis-GMA-based resin cement + tribochemical silica coating (G4), both using the respective dentin bonding systems, were the best luting protocols for the alumina ceramic. The null hypothesis was confirmed.     

Bonding to densely sintered alumina- and glass infiltrated aluminum / zirconium-based ceramics

The objective of this study was to test two hypotheses: (1) silica coating affects the bond strength between ceramics and a resin cement; (2) bond strength is affected by the type of ceramic. Twelve blocks 5 x 6 x 8 mm of In-Ceram Zirconia (ZR) and twelve Procera AllCeram (PR) ceramics were made and duplicated in composite. Five blocks of each ceramic were treated as follows: (1) ZR + GB (laboratorial airborne particles abrasion with Al2O3 particles) + silane; (2) ZR + SC (chairside tribochemical silica coating system, Cojet); (3) PR + GB; (4) PR + SC. Two treated samples of ceramic were analyzed under SEM. The ceramic-composite blocks were cemented with Panavia F and stored in 37oC distilled water for 7 days. They were then cut to produce bar specimens (n=30) with a bonding area of 0.6±0.1mm2. Specimens were loaded to failure under tension in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Bond strength (sigma) values were statistically analyzed using ANOVA (Two-way) and Tukey (alpha = 0.05). Mean sigma (MPa) and standard deviation were as follows: 1) 15.1 ± 5.3; 2) 26.8 ± 7.4; 3) 12.7 ± 2.6; 4) 18.5 ± 4.7. Silica coated surfaces showed statistically higher sigma than the same substrate treated with GB only. In addition, ZR (with vitreous phase) showed higher ó than PR (without vitreous phase).     

Microtensile bond strength of a repair composite to leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength of a repair composite resin to a leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic (Omega 900, VITA) submitted to two surface conditionings methods: 1) etching with hydrofluoric acid + silane application or 2) tribochemical silica coating. The null hypothesis is that both surface treatments can generate similar bond strengths. Ten ceramic blocks (6x6x6 mm) were fabricated and randomly assigned to 2 groups (n=5), according to the conditioning method: G1- 10% hydrofluoric acid application for 2 min plus rinsing and drying, followed by silane application for 30 s; G2- airborne particle abrasion with 30 microm silica oxide particles (CoJet-Sand) for 20 s using a chairside air-abrasion device (CoJet System), followed by silane application for 5 min. Single Bond adhesive system was applied to the surfaces and light cured (40 s). Z-250 composite resin was placed incrementally on the treated ceramic surface to build a 6x6x6 mm block. Bar specimens with an adhesive area of approximately 1 +/- 0.1 mm(2) were obtained from the composite-ceramic blocks (6 per block and 30 per group) for microtensile testing. No statistically significant difference was observed between G1 (10.19 +/- 3.1 MPa) and G2 (10.17 +/- 3.1 MPa) (p=0.982) (Student's t test; á = 0.05). The null hypothesis was, therefore, accepted. In conclusion, both surface conditioning methods provided similar microtensile bond strengths between the repair composite resin and the ceramic. Further studies using long-term aging procedures should be conducted.     

Bond strength of a resin cement to high-alumina and zirconia-reinforced ceramics: the effect of surface conditioning

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to three high-strength core ceramics: high alumina-based (In-Ceram Alumina, Procera AllCeram) and zirconia-reinforced alumina-based (In-Ceram Zirconia) ceramics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten blocks (5 x 6 x 8 mm) of In-Ceram Alumina (AL), In-Ceram Zirconia (ZR), and Procera (PR) ceramics were fabricated according to each manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in composite. The specimens were assigned to one of the two following treatment conditions: (1) airborne particle abrasion with 110-microm Al2O3 particles + silanization, (2) silica coating with 30 microm SiOx particles (CoJet, 3M ESPE) + silanization. Each ceramic block was duplicated in composite resin (W3D-Master, Wilcos, Petrópolis, RJ, Brazil) using a mold made out of silicon impression material. Composite resin layers were incrementally condensed into the mold to fill up the mold and each layer was light polymerized for 40 s. The composite blocks were bonded to the surface-conditioned ceramic blocks using a resin cement system (Panavia F, Kuraray, Okayama, Japan). One composite resin block was fabricated for each ceramic block. The ceramic-composite was stored at 37 degrees C in distilled water for 7 days prior to bond tests. The blocks were cut under water cooling to produce bar specimens (n = 30) with a bonding area of approximately 0.6 mm2. The bond strength tests were performed in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 1 mm/min). Bond strength values were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (< or = 0.05). RESULTS: Silica coating with silanization increased the bond strength significantly for all three high-strength ceramics (18.5 to 31.2 MPa) compared to that of airborne particle abrasion with 110-microm Al2O3 (12.7-17.3 MPa) (ANOVA, p < 0.05). PR exhibited the lowest bond strengths after both Al2O3 and silica coating (12.7 and 18.5 MPa, respectively). CONCLUSION: Conditioning the high-strength ceramic surfaces with silica coating and silanization provided higher bond strengths of the resin cement than with airborne particle abrasion with 110-microm Al2O3 and silanization.     

纳米硅涂层对玻璃渗透氧化铝陶瓷粘结强度的影响

目的：探讨利用溶胶凝胶法进行纳米硅涂层表面改性对玻璃渗透氧化铝陶瓷粘结强度的影响。方法：3组In-Ceram氧化铝瓷块分别施以“喷砂（P组）”、“喷砂＋硅烷偶联（PO组）”、“喷砂＋纳米硅涂层＋硅烷偶联（PTO）组）”的表面处理。制作陶瓷／复合树脂粘结体,室温下置蒸馏水中浸泡24h,微拉伸法测试各组试件粘结强度。结果：P组与PO组粘结强度较弱且无明显差异（P=0．797）,PTO组的粘结强度明显高于其他组（P〈0．05）。结论：通过溶胶凝胶法在喷砂表面制备纳米硅涂层后应用硅烷偶联剂可以显著提高In-Ceram氧化铝陶瓷的粘结强度。     

Study of thermocycling effect on the bond strength between an aluminous ceramic and a resin cement

This study evaluated the effect of thermocycling on the bond strength between Procera AllCeram (Nobel-Biocare) and a resin cement (Panavia F, Kuraray CO). Nine ceramic blocks with dimensions of 5x6x6mm were conditioned at one face with Rocatec System (Espe). After, they were luted with Panavia F to composite resin blocks (Clearfil AP-X, Kuraray CO). The nine groups formed by ceramic, cement and composite resin were split up obtaining 75 samples with dimensions of 12x1x1mm and adhesive surface presenting 1mm2±0.1mm2 of area. The samples were divided into 3 groups (n=25): G1 - 14 days in distilled water at 37oC; G2 - 6,000 cycles in water (5oC - 55oC - 30s); G3 - 12,000 cycles in water (5oC - 55oC - 30s). The samples were tested in a universal testing machine (EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey tests. The results indicated that mean values of rupture tension (MPa) of G1 (10.71 ± 3.54) did not differ statistically (p <5%) from G2 (9.01 ± 3.90), however there was statistical difference between G1 and G3 (7.28 ± 3.00). It was concluded that thermocycling significantly reduced the bond strength values when samples were submitted to 12,000 cycles.     

Early bond strength of two resin cements to Y-TZP ceramic using MPS or MPS/4-META silanes

For cementation of yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconium polycrystal (Y-TZP) ceramic frameworks, protocols of surface-conditioning methods and available cements vary, resulting in confusion among clinicians regarding selection and effects of different conditioning methods on cement adhesion. This study evaluated the effect of two silanes (3-trimethoxysilylpropylmethacrylate (MPS) and 3-trimethoxysilylpropylmethacrylate/4-methacryloyloxyethyl trimellitate anhydride methyl methacrylate (MPS/4-META) on the adhesion of two resin-based cements (SuperBond and Panavia F 2.0) to Y-TZP ceramic and compared several protocols with those indicated by the manufacturer of each of these cements. Disks of Y-TZP ceramic (LAVA, 3M ESPE) (n = 60) were divided into six experimental groups (n = 10 per group) and treated as follows: (1) silica coating (SC) + MPS silane + SuperBond; (2) SC + MPS/4-META + silane + SuperBond); (3) SC + MPS silane + Panavia F 2.0); (4) SC + MPS/4-META silane + Panavia F 2.0); (5) no conditioning + MPS/4-META silane + Super-Bond (SuperBond instructions); and (6) 50-μm Al₂O₃ conditioning + Panavia F 2.0 (Panavia F 2.0 instructions). The specimens were subjected to shear-bond testing after water storage at 37°C for 3 months in the dark. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance and Tukey’s HSD (α = 0.05). After silica coating, the mean bond strength of SuperBond cement was not significantly different between MPS and MPS/4-META silanes (20.2 ± 3.7 and 20.9 ± 1.6 MPa, respectively), but the mean bond strength of Panavia F 2.0 was significantly higher with MPS silane (24.4 ± 5.3 MPa) than with MPS/4-META (12.3 ± 1.4 MPa) (P < 0.001). The SuperBond manufacturer’s instructions alone resulted in significantly higher bond strength (9.7 ± 3.1 MPa) than the Panavia F 2.0 manufacturer’s instruction (0 MPa) (P < 0.001). When silica coating and silanization were used, both SuperBond and Panavia F 2.0 cements demonstrated higher bond strengths they did when the manufacturers’ instructions were followed. With SuperBond, use of MPS or MPS/4-META silane resulted in no significant difference when the ceramic surface was silica coated, but with Panavia F 2.0, use of MPS silane resulted in a significantly higher bond strength than use of MPS/4-META. Use of chairside silica coating and silanization to condition the zirconia surface improved adhesion compared with the manufacturers’ cementation protocols for SuperBond and Panavia F 2.0 resin cements.     

Effect of surface treatment of titanium posts on the tensile bond strength.

OBJECTIVES: Retention of composite resins to metal can be improved when metal surfaces are conditioned. The purpose of this investigation was to investigate the effect of two conditioning treatments on the tensile bond strength of four resin-based luting cements and zinc phosphate cement to titanium posts. METHODS: The effect on tensile bond strength of (1) air-particle abrasion (50 microm Al2O3) and (2) silica coating (30 microm SiO(x)) and silanization of tapered titanium posts prior to luting with any of the four resin composite luting cements (Compolute) Aplicap, Flexi-Flow cemTM, Panavia 21 EX, Twinlook) were evaluated. The posts luted with zinc phosphate cement (Tenet) were considered as the control group. Following endodontic preparation of 100 intact anterior human teeth with hand instruments, the post spaces were prepared using the opening drills of the corresponding size of the posts. All posts were cemented into the roots according to the manufacturer's instructions of each cement. The specimens were first stored in water at 37 degrees C for 24 h and then subjected to thermocycling (5000 cycles, 5-55 degrees C, 30 s). The tensile strength values were measured on a universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed statistically using ANOVA and corrected with Scheffé-test due to the significance levels (P<0.05). RESULTS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The composite resin luting cements did not show significant differences (P<0.05) showing values between (352+/-76N-475+/-104N) when the posts were air-abraded. After silica coating and silanization, significantly higher (P<0.05) tensile strengths were obtained for Compolute Aplicap (600+/-123N) than those of the other luting cements (Flexi-Flow cemTM: 191+/-62N; Panavia 21 EX: 375+/-77; Twinlook: 430+/-78N). No significant differences (P>0.05) were found between the tensile strength of the posts luted with zinc phosphate (414+/-102N) and the resin composite cements. Silica coating and silanization revealed the highest tensile bond strength in posts luted with Compolute Aplicap but it was not effective for the other experimental groups. Zinc phosphate cement exhibited tensile bond strength as good as resin composite cements.     

Effect of zirconium-oxide ceramic surface treatments on the bond strength to adhesive resin

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Surface treatment methods used for resin bonding to conventional silica-based dental ceramics are not reliable for zirconium-oxide ceramics. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of airborne-particle abrasion, silanization, tribochemical silica coating, and a combination of bonding/silane coupling agent surface treatment methods on the bond strength of zirconium-oxide ceramic to a resin luting agent. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty square-shaped (5 x 5 x 1.5 mm) zirconium-oxide ceramic (Cercon) specimens and composite resin (Z-250) cylinders (3 x 3 mm) were prepared. The ceramic surfaces were airborne-particle abraded with 125-microm aluminum-oxide (Al(2)O(3)) particles and then divided into 6 groups (n = 10) that were subsequently treated as follows: Group C, no treatment (control); Group SIL, silanized with a silane coupling agent (Clearfil Porcelain Bond Activator); Group BSIL, application of the adhesive 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate monomer (MDP)-containing bonding/silane coupling agent mixture (Clearfil Liner Bond 2V/ Porcelain Bond Activator); Group SC, silica coating using 30-microm Al(2)O(3) particles modified by silica (CoJet System); Group SCSIL, silica coating and silanization (CoJet System); and Group SCBSIL, silica coating and application of an MDP-containing bonding/silane coupling agent mixture (Clearfil Liner Bond 2V/Porcelain Bond Activator). The composite resin cylinders were bonded to the treated ceramic surfaces using an adhesive phosphate monomer-containing resin luting agent (Panavia F). After the specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 hours, their shear bonding strength was tested using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Debonded specimen surfaces were examined with a stereomicroscope to assess the mode of failure, and the treated surfaces were observed by scanning electron microscopy. Bond strength data were analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance and the Duncan test (alpha = .05). RESULTS: The bond strengths (mean +/- SD; MPa) in the groups were as follows: Group C, 15.7 +/- 2.9; Group SIL, 16.5 +/- 3.4; Group BSIL, 18.8 +/- 2.8; Group SC, 21.6 +/- 3.6; Group SCSIL, 21.9 +/- 3.9; and Group SCBSIL, 22.9 +/- 3.1. The bond strength was significantly higher in Group SCBSIL than in Groups C, SIL, and BSIL (P<.001), but did not differ significantly from those in Groups SC and SCSIL. Failure modes were primarily adhesive at the interface between zirconium and the resin luting agent in Groups C and SIL, and primarily mixed and cohesive in Groups SC, SCSIL, and SCBSIL. CONCLUSION: Tribochemical silica coating (CoJet System) and the application of an MDP-containing bonding/silane coupling agent mixture increased the shear bond strength between zirconium-oxide ceramic and resin luting agent (Panavia F).     

Influence of cement type and ceramic primer on retention of polymer-infiltrated ceramic crowns to a one-piece zirconia implant

Statement of problem

The best procedure for cementing a restoration to zirconia implants has not yet been established.

Tensile bond strength of resin-modified glass-ionomer cement to microabraded and silica-coated or tin-plated high noble ceramic alloy

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of alloy surface microabrasion, silica coating, or microabrasion plus tin plating on the tensile bond strengths between a resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cement and a high-noble alloy. Bond strength between the microabraded alloy specimens and conventional glass-ionomer cement or resin cement were included for comparison. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty uniform size, disk-shaped specimens were cast in a noble metal alloy and divided into 6 groups (n = 10 pairs/group). The metal surfaces of the specimens in each group were treated and cemented as follows. Group 1: No surface treatment (as cast, control), cemented with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. Group 2: Microabrasion with 50-microm aluminum oxide particles, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. Group 3: A laboratory microabrasion and silica coating system, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. Group 4: Microabrasion and tin-plating, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. Group 5: Microabrasion only, conventional glass-ionomer cement. Group 6: Microabrasion and tin-plating, conventional resin cement. The uniaxial tensile bond strength for each specimen pair was determined using an Instron Universal Testing Machine (Instron Corp, Canton, MA). Results were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (alpha = 0.05) and a Tukey post-hoc analysis. RESULTS: Mean bond strength: Group 1: 3.6 (+/- 1.5) MPa. Group 2: 4.2 (+/-0.5) MPa. Group 3: 6.7 (+/- 0.9) MPa. Group 4: 10.6 (+/- 1.8) MPa. Group 5: 1.1 (+/- 0.4) MPa. Group 6: 14.6 (+/- 2.3) MPa. Group 6 was significantly stronger than Group 4. The bond strength of specimens cemented with the resin-modified glass-ionomer cement using microabrasion and tin-plating (Group 4) was significantly stronger than all other groups except the resin cement with microabrasion and tin-plating (Group 6). CONCLUSION: Microabraded and tin-plated alloy specimens luted with the resin-modified glass-ionomer cement resulted in the greatest mean tensile strengths for the resin-modified glass-ionomer cement groups. This strength was 73% of the mean tensile strength of microabraded specimens luted with resin cement.     

硅涂层对牙科氧化铝陶瓷与树脂粘结强度的影响

目的 探讨在牙科氧化铝陶瓷表面进行SiO2水溶胶涂层对陶瓷与树脂粘结强度的影响.方法 32个氧化铝陶瓷试件根据计算机产生的伪随机数字表分为4组,每组8个,采用溶胶-凝胶法在试件表面分别进行20%SiO2水溶胶涂层+硅烷偶联剂(A组)、30%SiO2水溶胶涂层+硅烷偶联剂(B组)、40%溶胶涂层+硅烷偶联剂(C组)和硅烷偶联剂(对照组)处理,应用傅立叶红外光谱、扫描电镜、X射线能谱仪进行分析.制作陶瓷-复合树脂粘结体,剪切法测试各组剪切粘结强度.结果 溶胶-凝胶法可在氧化铝陶瓷试件表面制得纳米硅涂层.热处理后A、B、C 3组试件Si-O-Si反对称伸缩振动吸收峰、对称伸缩振动吸收峰、弯曲振动吸收峰均增强;扫描电镜显示纳米氧化硅粒子分布较均匀,局部粒子产生团聚;试件表面硅元素含量均明显增加.A、B、C组试件与树脂的剪切粘结强度分别为(3.196±0.171)Mpa、(4.852±0.178)Mpa、(3.576±0.671)Mpa,与对照组[(1.881±0.156)Mpa]相比,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);B组的剪切粘结强度与A、C组相比,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 3种浓度硅溶胶可在牙科氧化铝陶瓷表面制得纳米硅涂层.纳米硅涂层可显著提高氧化铝陶瓷与树脂的剪切粘结强度.其中30%浓度SiO2水溶胶制备的硅涂层提高剪切粘结强度的效果最明显.