Self-etching Primers vs Acid Conditioning - Impact on Bond Strength Between Ceramics and Resin Cement
At a Glance
Section titled āAt a Glanceā| Metadata | Details |
|---|---|
| Publication Date | 2018-03-07 |
| Journal | Operative Dentistry |
| Authors | JPM Tribst, Lilian Costa Anami, Mutlu Ćzcan, Marco AntĆ“nıo Bottıno, Renata Marques de Melo |
| Institutions | Universidade de Santo Amaro, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
| Citations | 66 |
Abstract
Section titled āAbstractāSUMMARY This study tested whether a self-etching surface agent and the conventional hydrofluoric acid (HF) would provide the same bonding capacity between resin cement and feldspathic (Fd) and lithium disilicate (Ld) ceramics. Ceramic blocks were cut with a low-speed diamond saw with water cooling (Isomet 1000, Buehler, Lake Bluff, IL, USA) into 20 blocks of 5 Ć 7 Ć 4 mm, which were ground flat in a polishing machine (EcoMet/AutoMet 250, Buehler) under water cooling. The blocks were randomly divided into eight groups (n=5), according to ceramic type (Ld or Fd), surface conditioning (HF + Monobond Plus or Etch and Prime), and aging by thermocycling (TC or absence-baseline). After 24 hours in 37Ā°C distilled water, blocks were embedded into acrylic resin and 1-mm2 cross-section beams composed of ceramic/cement/composite were obtained. The microtensile test was performed in a universal testing machine (DL-1000, EMIC, SĆ£o JosĆ© dos Campos, Brazil; 0.5 mm.minā1, 50 kgf load cell). Bond strength (MPa) was calculated by dividing the load at failure (in N) by the bonded area (mm2). The fractured specimens were examined under stereomicroscopy, and one representative sample of each group was randomly selected before the cementation and was further used for analysis using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS). The self-etching agent showed the highest bond strength for Fd (24.66Ā±4.5) and Ld (24.73Ā±6.9) ceramics and a decrease in surface wettability. SEM and EDS showed the presence of similar components in the tested materials with different topographies for both. Therefore, the self-etching primer was able to deliver even higher bonding than HF+silane to a resin cement.
Tech Support
Section titled āTech SupportāOriginal Source
Section titled āOriginal SourceāReferences
Section titled āReferencesā- 2009 - Bond strength durability of a resin composite on a resin-forced ceramic using various repair systems [Crossref]
- 2015 - Updating classifications of ceramic dental materials: a guide to material selection
- 2002 - Long-term clinical success of all-ceramic posterior restorations
- 2011 - Durability of microtensile bond to nonetched and etched feldspar ceramic: self-adhesive resin cements vs conventional resin
- 2011 - Effect of hydrofluoric acid etching duration on the roughness and flexural strength of a lithium disilicate-based glass ceramic [Crossref]
- 2016 - The effect of hydrofluoric acid etching duration on the surface micromorphology, roughness, and wettability of dental ceramics [Crossref]
- 2013 - Effect of resin cement type on the microtensile bond strength to lithium disilicate ceramic and dentin using different test assemblies
- 2015 - Surface conditioning protocol for the adhesion of resin-based materials to glassy matrix ceramics: how to condition and why?
- 2012 - Possible hazardous effects of hydrofluoric acid and recommendations for treatment approach: a review [Crossref]
- 2014 - Resin bond to indirect composite and new ceramic/polymer materials: a review of the literature [Crossref]