Microtensile bond strength of CAD/ CAM-fabricated polymer-ceramics to different adhesive resin cements
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objectives: This study evaluated the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of polymer-ceramic and indirect composite resin with 3 classes of resin cements. Materials and Methods: Two computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/ CAM)-fabricated polymer-ceramics (Enamic [ENA; Vita] and Lava Ultimate [LAV; 3M ESPE]) and a laboratory indirect composite resin (Gradia [GRA; GC Corp.]) were equally divided into 6 groups (n = 18) with 3 classes of resin cements: Variolink N (VAR; Vivadent), RelyX U200 (RXU; 3M ESPE), and Panavia F2 (PAN; Kuraray). The μTBS values were compared between groups by 2-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Tamhane test (α = 0.05). Results: Restorative materials and resin cements significantly influenced µTBS (p < 0.05). In the GRA group, the highest μTBS was found with RXU (27.40 ± 5.39 N) and the lowest with VAR (13.54 ± 6.04 N) (p < 0.05). Similar trends were observed in the ENA group. In the LAV group, the highest μTBS was observed with VAR (27.45 ± 5.84 N) and the lowest with PAN (10.67 ± 4.37 N) (p < 0.05). PAN had comparable results to those of ENA and GRA, whereas the μTBS values were significantly lower with LAV (p = 0.001). The highest bond strength of RXU was found with GRA (27.40 ± 5.39 N, p = 0.001). PAN showed the lowest µTBS with LAV (10.67 ± 4.37 N; p < 0.001). Conclusions: When applied according to the manufacturers' recommendations, the µTBS of polymer-ceramic CAD/CAM materials and indirect composites is influenced by the luting cements.
Abstract
Objectives: This study evaluated the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of polymer-ceramic and indirect composite resin with 3 classes of resin cements. Materials and Methods: Two computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/ CAM)-fabricated polymer-ceramics (Enamic [ENA; Vita] and Lava Ultimate [LAV; 3M ESPE]) and a laboratory indirect composite resin (Gradia [GRA; GC Corp.]) were equally divided into 6 groups (n = 18) with 3 classes of resin cements: Variolink N (VAR; Vivadent), RelyX U200 (RXU; 3M ESPE), and Panavia F2 (PAN; Kuraray). The μTBS values were compared between groups by 2-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Tamhane test (α = 0.05). Results: Restorative materials and resin cements significantly influenced µTBS (p < 0.05). In the GRA group, the highest μTBS was found with RXU (27.40 ± 5.39 N) and the lowest with VAR (13.54 ± 6.04 N) (p < 0.05). Similar trends were observed in the ENA group. In the LAV group, the highest μTBS was observed with VAR (27.45 ± 5.84 N) and the lowest with PAN (10.67 ± 4.37 N) (p < 0.05). PAN had comparable results to those of ENA and GRA, whereas the μTBS values were significantly lower with LAV (p = 0.001). The highest bond strength of RXU was found with GRA (27.40 ± 5.39 N, p = 0.001). PAN showed the lowest µTBS with LAV (10.67 ± 4.37 N; p < 0.001). Conclusions: When applied according to the manufacturers' recommendations, the µTBS of polymer-ceramic CAD/CAM materials and indirect composites is influenced by the luting cements.
참고문헌 (27)
- Della Bona A, "Characterization of a polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network material", Dent Mater, 30, pp.564~569 (2014)
- Fron Chabouis H, "Clinical efficacy of composite versus ceramic inlays and onlays : a systematic review", Dent Mater, 29, pp.1209~1218 (2013)
- Sripetchdanond J, "Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: an in vitro study", J Prosthet Dent, 112, pp.1141~1150 (2014)
- Elsaka SE, "Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD", CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems, 2015, pp.34, 161~167
- Angeletaki F, "Direct versus indirect inlay", onlay composite restorations in posterior teeth. A systematic review and meta-analysis, 2016, pp.53, 12~21
- Gracis S, "A new classification system for all-ceramic and ceramic-like restorative materials", Int J Prosthodont, 28, pp.227~235 (2015)
- Cekic-Nagas I, "Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic", glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials, 2016, pp.60, 265~273
- Swain MV, "Interpenetrating network ceramic-resin composite dental restorative materials", Dent Mater, 32, pp.34~42 (2016)
- Awada A, "Mechanical properties of resin-ceramic CAD", CAM restorative materials, 2015, pp.114, 587~593
- Kumbuloglu O, "Clinical survival of indirect, anterior 3-unit surface-retained fibre-reinforced composite fixed dental prosthesis: up to 7.5-years follow-up", J Dent, 43, pp.656~663 (2015)
- Jongsma LA, "Clinical success and survival of indirect resin composite crowns : results of a 3-year prospective study", Dent Mater, 28, pp.952~960 (2012)
- Frankenberger R, "Adhesive luting of new CAD", CAM materials, 2015, pp.18, 9~20
- Elsaka SE, "Bond strength of novel CAD", CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments, 2014, pp.16, 531~540
- Yoshihara K, "Sandblasting may damage the surface of composite CAD-CAM blocks", Dent Mater, 33, pp.e124~e135 (2017)
- Peumans M, "Bonding effectiveness of luting composites to different CAD", CAM materials, 2016, pp.18, 289~302
- Flury S, "Dentin bond strength of two resin-ceramic computer-aided design", computer-aided manufacturing (CAD, CAM-materials after storage, pp.Dent Mater J, 2016[DOI]
- da Silva EM, "Stability of the bond between two resin cements and an yttria-stabilized zirconia ceramic after six months of aging in water", J Prosthet Dent, 112, pp.568~575 (2014)
- Ferracane JL, "Self-adhesive resin cements - chemistry, properties and clinical considerations", J Oral Rehabil, 38, pp.295~314 (2011)
- Frassetto A, "Kinetics of polymerization and contraction stress development in self-adhesive resin cements", Dent Mater, 28, pp.1032~1039 (2012)
- Campos F, "Resin bonding to a hybrid ceramic : effects of surface treatments and aging", Oper Dent, 41, pp.171~178 (2016)
- Keul C, "Stawarcxyk. Tensile bond strength of PMMA- and composite-based CAD", CAM materials to luting cements after different conditioning methods, 2013, pp.46, 122~127
- El Zohairy AA, "Microtensile bond strength testing of luting cements to prefabricated CAD", CAM ceramic and composite blocks, 2003, pp.19, 575~583
- Stawarczyk B, "Effect of surface conditioning with airborne-particle abrasion on the tensile strength of polymeric CAD", CAM crowns luted with self-adhesive and conventional resin cements, 2012, pp.107, 94~101
- Pereira SG, "Effect of curing protocol on the polymerization of dual-cured resin cements", Dent Mater, 26, pp.710~718 (2010)
- Kumbuloglu O, "A study of the physical and chemical properties of four resin composite luting cements", Int J Prosthodont, 17, pp.357~363 (2004)
- Gilbert S, "Bonding between CAD", CAM resin and resin composite cements dependent on bonding agents : three different in vitro test methods, 2016, pp.20, 227~236
- El Zohairy AA, "The influence of specimen attachment and dimension on microtensile strength", J Dent Res, 83, pp.420~424 (2004)