Bond strength between titanium and polymer-based materials adhesively cemented.

Camilla Johansson, Aleksandra Håkansson, Evaggelia Papia
{"title":"Bond strength between titanium and polymer-based materials adhesively cemented.","authors":"Camilla Johansson,&nbsp;Aleksandra Håkansson,&nbsp;Evaggelia Papia","doi":"10.1080/26415275.2021.1937182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim was to evaluate the bond strength between titanium and polymer-based materials for prosthetic restorations, cemented with different adhesive cement systems. Eight groups with 13 specimens in each group were included. Each specimen consisted of two parts: a cylinder of titanium resembling a titanium base, and a cylinder of one of two polymer-based materials Micro Filled Hybrid (MFH) or Telio CAD and cemented with one of four adhesive cement systems, namely Multilink Hybrid Abutment, Panavia V5, RelyX Ultimate and G-Cem LinkAce. The titanium was sandblasted with 50 µm Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> and treated according to each cement manufacturer's recommendations. The polymer-based materials were pre-treated according to the manufacturer's instructions including sandblasting for MFH. After cementation, the groups were water stored for one day before thermocycling: 5000 cycles in 5-55 °C. A shear bond strength test was performed (crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min) and data was analysed with one-way ANOVA, Tukey's test. Telio CAD cemented with Panavia V5 and G-Cem LinkAce showed significantly lower bond strength compared to all other groups, due to spontaneous debonding. The highest numerical bond strength was found in the group of MFH cemented with RelyX Ultimate or with G-Cem LinkAce. Generally, the Telio CAD groups showed lower bond strength values than the MFH groups. The conclusions are that pre-treatment methods and choice of cement system are of importance for polymer-based materials for prosthetic restorations. The bond strength is adequate for provisional cementation irrespective of cement system when pre-treating by sandblasting, but cement dependent without sandblasting.</p>","PeriodicalId":72378,"journal":{"name":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/26415275.2021.1937182","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomaterial investigations in dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2021.1937182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate the bond strength between titanium and polymer-based materials for prosthetic restorations, cemented with different adhesive cement systems. Eight groups with 13 specimens in each group were included. Each specimen consisted of two parts: a cylinder of titanium resembling a titanium base, and a cylinder of one of two polymer-based materials Micro Filled Hybrid (MFH) or Telio CAD and cemented with one of four adhesive cement systems, namely Multilink Hybrid Abutment, Panavia V5, RelyX Ultimate and G-Cem LinkAce. The titanium was sandblasted with 50 µm Al2O3 and treated according to each cement manufacturer's recommendations. The polymer-based materials were pre-treated according to the manufacturer's instructions including sandblasting for MFH. After cementation, the groups were water stored for one day before thermocycling: 5000 cycles in 5-55 °C. A shear bond strength test was performed (crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min) and data was analysed with one-way ANOVA, Tukey's test. Telio CAD cemented with Panavia V5 and G-Cem LinkAce showed significantly lower bond strength compared to all other groups, due to spontaneous debonding. The highest numerical bond strength was found in the group of MFH cemented with RelyX Ultimate or with G-Cem LinkAce. Generally, the Telio CAD groups showed lower bond strength values than the MFH groups. The conclusions are that pre-treatment methods and choice of cement system are of importance for polymer-based materials for prosthetic restorations. The bond strength is adequate for provisional cementation irrespective of cement system when pre-treating by sandblasting, but cement dependent without sandblasting.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
钛与聚合物基材料的粘接强度。
目的是评估钛和聚合物基材料之间的粘结强度,用于假体修复,用不同的粘合剂水泥系统胶结。共8组,每组13只。每个试件由两部分组成:一个圆柱体的钛类似于钛基,另一个圆柱体由两种聚合物基材料中的一种制成,这种材料是Micro - filling Hybrid (MFH)或Telio CAD,并用四种胶结水泥系统中的一种进行胶结,即Multilink Hybrid Abutment、Panavia V5、RelyX Ultimate和G-Cem LinkAce。钛用50µm Al2O3喷砂,并按照各水泥厂家的建议进行处理。根据制造商的说明对聚合物基材料进行预处理,包括MFH喷砂。胶结后,将各组放入水中保存一天,然后在5-55°C中进行热循环:5000次循环。进行剪切粘结强度测试(十字头速度0.5 mm/min),并使用单向方差分析(Tukey’s test)对数据进行分析。Panavia V5和G-Cem LinkAce胶结的Telio CAD与所有其他组相比,由于自发脱粘,胶结强度显着降低。用RelyX Ultimate和G-Cem LinkAce粘合MFH组的数值粘结强度最高。一般来说,Telio CAD组的粘结强度值低于MFH组。结论:聚合物基修复材料的预处理方法和水泥体系的选择是重要的。喷砂预处理时,无论水泥体系如何,粘结强度都足以满足临时胶结,但不喷砂则依赖水泥。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Recipient of Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry's Young Author Award 2023. Reliability and agreement of root length measurements during orthodontic treatment in images from different CBCT machines using multiplanar reconstruction. The sealing ability of different endodontic biomaterials as an intra-orifice barrier: evaluation with high-performance liquid chromatography. An in vitro study on the influence of laser-activated irrigation on infiltration and leakage of a dual curing-resin cement as an endodontic sealer Accumulation and removal of Streptococcus mutans biofilm on enamel and root surfaces in vitro
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1