Shear bond strength of a ceramic to Co-Cr alloys

Statement of problem. Different combinations of Co-Cr alloys bonded to ceramic have been used in dentistry; however, the bond strength of ceramic to metal can vary because of different compositions of these alloys.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of a dental ceramic to 5 commercially available Co-Cr alloys.Material and methods. Five Co-Cr alloys (IPS d.SIGN 20, IPS d.SIGN 30, Remanium 2000, Heranium P, and Wirobond C) were tested and compared to a control group of an Au-Pd alloy (Olympia). Specimen disks, 5 mm high and 4 mm in diameter, were fabricated with the lost-wax technique. Sixty specimens were prepared using opaque and dentin ceramics (VITA Omega 900), veneered, 4 mm high and 4 mm in diameter, over the metal specimens (n = 10). The shear bond strength test was performed in a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. After shear bond testing, fracture surfaces were evaluated in a stereomicroscope under x25 magnification. Ultimate shear bond strength (MPa) data were analyzed with 1-way ANOVA and the Tukey HSD test (alpha = .05).Results. The mean (SID) bond strengths (MPa) were: 61.4 (7.8) for Olympia; 94.0 (18.9) for IPS 20; 96.8 (10.2) for I PS 30; 75.1 (12.4) for Remanium; 71.2 (14.3) for Heranium P; and 63.2 (10.9) for Wirobond C. Mean bond strengths for IPS 20 and IPS 30 were not significantly different, but were significantly (P<.001) higher than mean bond strengths for the other 4 alloys, which were not significantly different from each other.Conclusions. Bond strength of a dental ceramic to a Co-Cr alloy is dependent on the alloy composition.

Influence of Surface Treatment on the Shear Bond Strength of Ceramics Fused to Cobalt-Chromium

Purpose: To evaluate the influence of surface treatment on the shear bond strength between a Co-Cr alloy and two ceramics.Materials and Methods: Forty-eight metal cylinders were made (thickness: 4 mm, height: 3.7 mm) according ISO TR 11405. The 48 metallic cylinders were divided into four groups (n = 12), according to the veneering ceramic (StarLight Ceram and Duceram Kiss) and surface treatments: air-particle abrasion with Al(2)O(3) or tungsten drill (W). Gr1: StarLight + Al(2)O(3); Gr2: StarLight + W; Gr3: Duceram + Al(2)O(3); and Gr4: Duceram + W. The specimens were aged using thermal cycling (3000 x, 5 to 55 degrees C, dwell time: 30 seconds, transfer time: 2 seconds). The shear test was performed with a universal testing machine, using a load cell of 100 kg (speed: 0.5 mm/min) and a specific device. The bond strength data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%), and the failure modes were analyzed using an optical microscope (30x).Results: The means and standard deviations of the shear bond strengths were (MPa): G1 (57.97 +/- 11.34); G2 (40.62 +/- 12.96); G3 (47.09 +/- 13.19); and G4 (36.80 +/- 8.86). Ceramic (p = 0.03252) and surface treatment (p = 0.0002) significantly affected the mean bond strength values.Conclusions: Air-particle abrasion with Al(2)O(3) improved the shear bond strength between metal and ceramics used.

Effect of testing methods on the bond strength of resin to zirconia-alumina ceramic: microtensile versus shear test

This study tested the bond strength of a resin cement to a glass-infiltrated zirconia-alumina ceramic after three conditioning methods and using two test methods (shear-SBS versus microtensile-MTBS). Ceramic blocks for MTBS and ceramic disks for SBS were fabricated. Three surface conditioning (SC) methods were evaluated: (1) 110-mu m Al(2)O(3)+Silanization; (2) Chairside silica coating+silanization: (3) Laboratory silica coating+silanization. Following surface conditioning, the resin cement (Panavia F) was bonded to the conditioned ceramics. Although no statistically significant differences (p=0.1076) were seen between the test methods, results yielded with the different surface conditioning methods showed statistically significant differences (p<0.0001) (SC2=SC3>SC1.). As for the interaction between the factors, two-way ANOVA showed that it was not statistically significant (p=0.1443). MTBS test resulted in predominantly mixed failure (85%), but SBS test resulted in exclusively adhesive failure. on the effects of different surface conditioning methods, chairside and laboratory tribochemical silica coating followed by silanization showed higher bond strength results compared to those of aluminum oxide abrasion and silanization, independent of the test method employed.

Evaluation of the shear bond strength of a composite resin in sound, demineralized and hypermineralized bovine dentin after irradiation with Er:YAG and Nd:YAG lasers, employing a self-etching adhesive system

Background and Objectives. The adhesion of dental materials is important for the success of treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the bond strength of a composite resin applied with a self-etching adhesive system in different dentins after irradiation with Er:YAG and Nd:YAG lasers, observing their morphologic pattern using Scanning Electronic Microscopy (SEM). Materials and Methods. The buccal surface of 72 bovine incisors was worn until exposure of medium depth dentin. The specimens were divided into three groups; GI: normal, GII: demineralized and GIII: hypermineralized dentin. These were also divided into two subgroups; A-irradiated for 30 s with Er:YAG laser in noncontact mode at 40 mJ and 6 Hz and B- irradiated for 30 s with Nd:YAG laser in contact mode at 60 mJ and 10 Hz. The adhesive system Clearfil SE. Bond (Kuraray) and composite resin Tetric Ceram (Vivadent) were applied on the irradiated area by the incremental technique. After storage for 24 h in distilled water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were submitted to the shear strength test in a universal testing machine (EMIC) at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Other specimens were made to be analyzed by SEM. Results. The results were statistically analyzed by Analysis of Variance and the Tukey test. Regardless of the type of dentin, the bond strength of specimens irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser (8,94 +/- 2,07) was higher compared to specimens irradiated with the Er:YAG laser (7,03 +/- 2,47); the highest bond strength was obtained for the group of hypermineralized dentin irradiated with the Nd:YAG laser. The SEM analysis showed that the Er:YAG laser caused opening of tubules and the Nd:YAG laser produced areas of fusion as well as regions of opening of dentinal tubules. Conclusions. The dentin showed different morphological patterns and the laser promote alterations on their surfaces, influencing the bond strength of the composite resin. (C) 2010 Laser Institute of America.

Micro-Shear Bond Strength of Different Adhesives to Human Dental Enamel

The aim of this study was to evaluate the micro-shear bond strength of 5 adhesive systems to enamel, one single-bottle acid-etch adhesive (O), two self-etching primers (P) and two all-in-one self-etching adhesives (S). Method: Sixty premolar enamel surfaces (buccal or lingual) were ground flat with 400- and 600-grit SiC papers and randomly divided into 5 groups (n=12), according to the adhesive system.. SB2 - Single Bond 2 (O); CSE - Clearfil SE Bond (P); ADS - AdheSE (P); PLP - Adper Prompt L-Pop (S); XE3 - Xeno III (S). Tygon tubing (inner diameter of 0.8mm) restricted the bonding area to obtain the resin composite (Z250) cylinders. After storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24h and thermocycling, micro-shear testing was performed (crosshead speed of 0.5mm/min). Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA and Tukey test (a=5%). Samples were also subjected to stereomicroscopic and SEM evaluations after micro-shear testing. Mean bond strength values (MPa +/- SD) and the results of Tukey test were: SB2: 36.36(+/- 3.34)a; ADS: 33.03(+/- 7.83)a; XE3: 32.76(+/- 5.61)a; CSE: 30.61(+/- 6.68)a; PLP: 22.17(+/- 6.05)b. Groups with the same letter were not statistically different. It can be concluded that no significant difference was there between SB2, ADS, XE3 and CSE, in spite of different etching patterns of these adhesives. Only PLP presented statistically lower bond strengths compared with others. J Clin Pediatr Dent 35(3): 301-304, 2011

Comparative in vitro study of the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with restorative and orthodontic resins

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of brackets bonded with different restorative systems and compare it with that afforded by an established orthodontic bonding system. Seventy human bicuspids were used, divided into five different groups with 14 teeth each. Whereas a specific orthodontic bonding resin (Transbond (TM) XT) was used in the control group, the restorative systems Charisma, Tetric Ceram, TPH Spectrum and Z100 were used in the other four groups. Seven days after bonding the brackets to the samples, shear forces were applied under pressure in a universal testing machine. The data collected was evaluated using the ANOVA test and, when a difference was identified, the Tukey test was applied. A 5% level of significance was adopted. The mean results of the shear bond strength tests were as follows: Group 1 (Charisma), 14.98 MPa; Group 2 (Tetric Ceram), 15.16 MPa; Group 3 (TPH), 17.70 MPa; Group 4 (Z100), 13.91 MPa; and Group 5 or control group (Transbond (TM) XT), 17.15 MPa. No statistically significant difference was found among the groups. It was concluded that all tested resins have sufficient bond strength to be recommended for bonding orthodontic brackets.

Shear strength evaluation of composite-composite resin associations

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the shear strength between distinct associations of different commercial composite resins and their fracture modes.Methods: Nine composite-composite associations (n = 90) were prepared for shear strength evaluation and separated into the following groups: Z/Z (Filtek Z250 UD + Filtek Z250 A2); Z/ D (Filtek Z250 UD + Durafill VS A2); Z/S (Filtek Z250 UD + Filtek Supreme YT); C/C (Charisma OA2 + Charisma A2); C/D (Charisma OA2 + Durafill VS A2); C/S (Charisma OA2 + Filtek Supreme YT); H/H (Herculite XRV B2D + Herculite XRV B2E); H/D (Herculite XRV B2D + Durafill VS A2); H/S (Herculite XRV B2D + Filtek Supreme YT). Shear tests were carried out using universal mechanical test equipment with a load of 200 kgf and speed of 0.5 mm/min. Ultimate shear strength data (MPa) from all tested groups were submitted to analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) and the Tukey test. The fractured surfaces of the test samples were visually evaluated by binocular stereomicroscope at 20 times magnification. Fractures were classified as either adhesive or cohesive or mixed.Results: The highest ultimate shear strength observed for composite-composite associations was found for the groups: Z/Z, C/S, H/H, H/S, Z/S and C/C. Those associations containing the Durafill resin were weaker than the others.Conclusion: Microparticle RBC associations presented lower shear strength than hybrid and/or nanoparticle RBC associations, once the only significant difference was found when the Durafill resin was involved. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shear bond strength of adhesive systems to enamel and dentin. Thermocycling influence

Objectives: The purpose of the this study was to evaluate the influence of thermocycling on shear bond strength on bovine enamel and dentin surfaces of different adhesive systems. Methods: Thirty sound bovine incisors were sectioned in mesiodistal and inciso-cervical direction obtaining 60 incisal surfaces (enamel) and 60 cervical surfaces (dentin). Specimens were randomly assigned to 3 groups of equal size (n = 40), according to the adhesive system used: I-Single Bond; II-Prime & Bond NT/NRC; III-One Coat Bond. After 24-h storage in distilled water at 37 o C, each main group was divided into two subgroups: A- specimens tested after 24 h storage in distilled water at 37°C; B - specimens submitted to thermocycling (500 cycles). Shear bond strength tests were performed. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey test. Results: Means (MPa) of different groups were: I-AE-16.96, AD-17.46; BE-21.60, BD-12.79; II-AE-17.20, AD-11.93; BE-20.67, BD-13.94; III-AE-25.66, AD-17.53; BE-24.20, BD-19.38. Significance: Thermocycling did not influence significantly the shear bond strength of the tested adhesive systems; enamel was the dental substrate that showed larger adhesive strength; One Coat Bond system showed the best adhesive strength averages regardless of substrate or thermocycling. © 2005 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.