Cargando…

Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic and to compare it with lithium disilicate ceramic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this in vitro study, 80...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nakhaei, Mohammadreza, Mohammadipour, Hamideh-Sadat, Eslami, Seyyed-Farzan, Soroush, Zahra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10300266/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388300
_version_ 1785064549556158464
author Nakhaei, Mohammadreza
Mohammadipour, Hamideh-Sadat
Eslami, Seyyed-Farzan
Soroush, Zahra
author_facet Nakhaei, Mohammadreza
Mohammadipour, Hamideh-Sadat
Eslami, Seyyed-Farzan
Soroush, Zahra
author_sort Nakhaei, Mohammadreza
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic and to compare it with lithium disilicate ceramic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this in vitro study, 80 specimens containing two glass ceramics of IPS e.max press and VITA SUPRINITY were prepared and categorized into four groups according to the surface treatments (n = 10) as Group 1 (C): no treatment (control); Group 2 (HF): etching with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s followed by silane application; Group 3 (SPH): sandblasting with Al(2)O(3) particles (50 μm), etching with 35% phosphoric acid for 40 s followed by application of silane and adhesive (Clearfil liner bond F); and Group 4 (SB): sandblasting with Al(2)O(3) followed by silanization. Then, a resin cement (Panavia F2) was applied to the prepared ceramic surfaces. All samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles, 5–55). The μSBS test was evaluated and failure modes were recorded. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk, two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's Honest Significant Difference post hoc tests (P < 0.05). RESULTS: IPS e.max press samples revealed significantly higher μSBS values compared to VITA SUPRINITY (P < 0.001), in whole surface treatments. The HF group showed the highest μSBS value, followed by the SPH and SB groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Adhesive failure was recorded as a predominant failure mode. CONCLUSION: The adhesion performance of IPS e.max press was significantly higher than VITA SUPRINITY. The common surface treatment protocol including HF application followed by silanization was the most effective surface treatment for both glass ceramics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10300266
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103002662023-06-29 Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments Nakhaei, Mohammadreza Mohammadipour, Hamideh-Sadat Eslami, Seyyed-Farzan Soroush, Zahra Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the microshear bond strength (μSBS) of resin cement to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic and to compare it with lithium disilicate ceramic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this in vitro study, 80 specimens containing two glass ceramics of IPS e.max press and VITA SUPRINITY were prepared and categorized into four groups according to the surface treatments (n = 10) as Group 1 (C): no treatment (control); Group 2 (HF): etching with 9% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s followed by silane application; Group 3 (SPH): sandblasting with Al(2)O(3) particles (50 μm), etching with 35% phosphoric acid for 40 s followed by application of silane and adhesive (Clearfil liner bond F); and Group 4 (SB): sandblasting with Al(2)O(3) followed by silanization. Then, a resin cement (Panavia F2) was applied to the prepared ceramic surfaces. All samples were subjected to thermal aging (5000 cycles, 5–55). The μSBS test was evaluated and failure modes were recorded. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro–Wilk, two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's Honest Significant Difference post hoc tests (P < 0.05). RESULTS: IPS e.max press samples revealed significantly higher μSBS values compared to VITA SUPRINITY (P < 0.001), in whole surface treatments. The HF group showed the highest μSBS value, followed by the SPH and SB groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Adhesive failure was recorded as a predominant failure mode. CONCLUSION: The adhesion performance of IPS e.max press was significantly higher than VITA SUPRINITY. The common surface treatment protocol including HF application followed by silanization was the most effective surface treatment for both glass ceramics. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC10300266/ /pubmed/37388300 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Dental Research Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Nakhaei, Mohammadreza
Mohammadipour, Hamideh-Sadat
Eslami, Seyyed-Farzan
Soroush, Zahra
Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title_full Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title_fullStr Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title_full_unstemmed Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title_short Microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
title_sort microshear bond strength of resin cement to a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass ceramic using different surface treatments
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10300266/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388300
work_keys_str_mv AT nakhaeimohammadreza microshearbondstrengthofresincementtoazirconiareinforcedlithiumsilicateglassceramicusingdifferentsurfacetreatments
AT mohammadipourhamidehsadat microshearbondstrengthofresincementtoazirconiareinforcedlithiumsilicateglassceramicusingdifferentsurfacetreatments
AT eslamiseyyedfarzan microshearbondstrengthofresincementtoazirconiareinforcedlithiumsilicateglassceramicusingdifferentsurfacetreatments
AT soroushzahra microshearbondstrengthofresincementtoazirconiareinforcedlithiumsilicateglassceramicusingdifferentsurfacetreatments