We have located links that may give you full text access.
Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials.
Journal of Prosthodontic Research 2016 March 11
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of hydrofluoric acid treatment on bond strength of resin cements to three different types of ceramic/glass containing CAD-CAM block composite materials.
METHODS: CAD-CAM block materials of polymer infiltrated (Vita Enamic), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate) and nanoceramic (Cerasmart) with a thickness of 1.5mm were randomly divided into two groups according to the surface treatment performed. In Group 1, specimens were wet-ground with silicon carbide abrasive papers up to no. 1000. In Group 2, 9.6% hydrofluoric acid gel was applied to ceramics. Three different resin cements (RelyX, Variolink Esthetic and G-CEM LinkAce) were applied to the tubes in 1.2-mm thick increments and light-cured for 40s using LED light curing unit. Half of the specimens (n=10) were submitted to thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55°C). The strength measurements were accomplished with a universal testing machine (Lloyd Instruments) at a cross-head speed of 0.5mm/min until the failure occurs. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and Tukey's post hoc tests (α=0.05).
RESULTS: There were significant differences between ceramics and resin cements (p<0.001). However, hydrofluoric acid gel treatment had no effect on bond strength values (p=0.073). In addition, thermal cycling significantly decreased bond strength values of resin cements to ceramics (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of appropriate resin cement systems with different ceramic/glass-polymer materials might promote the bonding capacity of these systems.
METHODS: CAD-CAM block materials of polymer infiltrated (Vita Enamic), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate) and nanoceramic (Cerasmart) with a thickness of 1.5mm were randomly divided into two groups according to the surface treatment performed. In Group 1, specimens were wet-ground with silicon carbide abrasive papers up to no. 1000. In Group 2, 9.6% hydrofluoric acid gel was applied to ceramics. Three different resin cements (RelyX, Variolink Esthetic and G-CEM LinkAce) were applied to the tubes in 1.2-mm thick increments and light-cured for 40s using LED light curing unit. Half of the specimens (n=10) were submitted to thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55°C). The strength measurements were accomplished with a universal testing machine (Lloyd Instruments) at a cross-head speed of 0.5mm/min until the failure occurs. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed with multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and Tukey's post hoc tests (α=0.05).
RESULTS: There were significant differences between ceramics and resin cements (p<0.001). However, hydrofluoric acid gel treatment had no effect on bond strength values (p=0.073). In addition, thermal cycling significantly decreased bond strength values of resin cements to ceramics (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of appropriate resin cement systems with different ceramic/glass-polymer materials might promote the bonding capacity of these systems.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app