Effect of Adhesive Resin Application on the Durability of Adhesion to CAD/CAM Glass-Ceramics after either Hydrofluoric Acid Etching or Self-etch Primer Application.
Taciana Emília Leite Vila-Nova, Dayanne Monielle Duarte Moura, Gabriela Monteiro de Araújo, Rafael de Almeida Spinelli Pinto, Fabíola Pessôa Pereira Leite, Renata Marques Melo, Mutlu Özcan, Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção E Souza
{"title":"Effect of Adhesive Resin Application on the Durability of Adhesion to CAD/CAM Glass-Ceramics after either Hydrofluoric Acid Etching or Self-etch Primer Application.","authors":"Taciana Emília Leite Vila-Nova, Dayanne Monielle Duarte Moura, Gabriela Monteiro de Araújo, Rafael de Almeida Spinelli Pinto, Fabíola Pessôa Pereira Leite, Renata Marques Melo, Mutlu Özcan, Rodrigo Othávio de Assunção E Souza","doi":"10.3290/j.jad.b3240691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effect of two surface conditioning methods, namely conventional hydrofluoric acid vs self-etching primer, and the application of adhesive on the bond strength of resin cement to CAD/CAM glass-ceramics.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Blocks (N = 96) (12 x 10 x 2.5 mm) were manufactured, 24 for each tested ceramic type: lithium silicate ceramic (LS), polymer-infiltrated ceramic (PIC), leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic (FD), and lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic (LD). For bond strength testing, 64 blocks were randomly divided into 16 groups (4 blocks per group) according to the following factors: ceramic: 4 levels; etching: 2 levels (HFS: hydrofluoric acid + silane or Monobond Etch & Prime [MEP]); and adhesive application: 2 levels, with (signified as A) and without. Then for each group, 15 resin cement cylinders (AllCem Dual, FGM) were built up. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling (10,000 cycles) and to shear bonding strength testing (SBS) (100 kgf, 0.5 mm/min). Mean shear stresses (MPa) were statistically analyzed by three-way ANOVA, Tukey's test, and Weibull analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean bond strength of group PIC-HFS-A (28.45 ± 7.6 MPa) was significantly higher than that of groups LS-HFS-A (12.11 ± 2.7MPa) and FDHFSA (20.86 ± 2.0MPa). Group PIC-HFS bond strength (25.02 ± 6.5 MPa) was significantly higher only when compared to group LS-HFS (15.82 ± 4.4 MPa). The LS group presented lower SBS compared to all other groups. No significant differences were found between HFS and MEP surface treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Surface treatment with MEP promotes adhesion similar to that of HFS. Additional application of adhesive after the surface treatments did not improve the bond strength.</p>","PeriodicalId":55604,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Adhesive Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Adhesive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.b3240691","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effect of two surface conditioning methods, namely conventional hydrofluoric acid vs self-etching primer, and the application of adhesive on the bond strength of resin cement to CAD/CAM glass-ceramics.
Materials and methods: Blocks (N = 96) (12 x 10 x 2.5 mm) were manufactured, 24 for each tested ceramic type: lithium silicate ceramic (LS), polymer-infiltrated ceramic (PIC), leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic (FD), and lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic (LD). For bond strength testing, 64 blocks were randomly divided into 16 groups (4 blocks per group) according to the following factors: ceramic: 4 levels; etching: 2 levels (HFS: hydrofluoric acid + silane or Monobond Etch & Prime [MEP]); and adhesive application: 2 levels, with (signified as A) and without. Then for each group, 15 resin cement cylinders (AllCem Dual, FGM) were built up. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling (10,000 cycles) and to shear bonding strength testing (SBS) (100 kgf, 0.5 mm/min). Mean shear stresses (MPa) were statistically analyzed by three-way ANOVA, Tukey's test, and Weibull analysis.
Results: The mean bond strength of group PIC-HFS-A (28.45 ± 7.6 MPa) was significantly higher than that of groups LS-HFS-A (12.11 ± 2.7MPa) and FDHFSA (20.86 ± 2.0MPa). Group PIC-HFS bond strength (25.02 ± 6.5 MPa) was significantly higher only when compared to group LS-HFS (15.82 ± 4.4 MPa). The LS group presented lower SBS compared to all other groups. No significant differences were found between HFS and MEP surface treatments.
Conclusion: Surface treatment with MEP promotes adhesion similar to that of HFS. Additional application of adhesive after the surface treatments did not improve the bond strength.
期刊介绍：
New materials and applications for adhesion are profoundly changing the way dentistry is delivered. Bonding techniques, which have long been restricted to the tooth hard tissues, enamel, and dentin, have obvious applications in operative and preventive dentistry, as well as in esthetic and pediatric dentistry, prosthodontics, and orthodontics. The current development of adhesive techniques for soft tissues and slow-releasing agents will expand applications to include periodontics and oral surgery. Scientifically sound, peer-reviewed articles explore the latest innovations in these emerging fields.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
