A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD-CAM block materials
Tekijät: Cekic-Nagas Isil, Ergun Gulfem, Egilmez Ferhan, Vallittu Pekka Kalevi, Lassila Lippo VJ
Kustantaja: ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
Julkaisuvuosi: 2016
Journal: Journal of Prosthodontic Research
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH
Lehden akronyymi: J PROSTHODONT RES
Vuosikerta: 60
Numero: 4
Aloitussivu: 265
Lopetussivu: 273
Sivujen määrä: 9
ISSN: 1883-1958
eISSN: 2212-4632
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.02.003
Tiivistelmä
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 1.5 mm 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 40 s using LED light curing unit. Half of the specimens (n = 10) were submitted to thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55 degrees C). The strength measurements were accomplished with a universal testing machine (Lloyd Instruments) at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/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 (alpha = 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. (C) 2016 Japan Prosthodontic Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
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 1.5 mm 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 40 s using LED light curing unit. Half of the specimens (n = 10) were submitted to thermal cycling (5000 cycles, 5-55 degrees C). The strength measurements were accomplished with a universal testing machine (Lloyd Instruments) at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/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 (alpha = 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. (C) 2016 Japan Prosthodontic Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali