252 resultados para Resin bond
Resumo:
The aim of the present study was to assess the shear bond strength between a heat-polymerized denture base resin and acrylic resin teeth after immersion in different denture cleansers by simulating a 180-day use. Two acrylic teeth (Biotone, Biotone IPN, Dentsply Ind. e Com., Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil) were chosen for bonding to a heat-polymerized denture base resin (Lucitone 550- Dentsply Ind. e Com., Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil). Eighty specimens were produced and divided into eight groups (n=10) according to their experimental condition (distilled water, 2% chlorhexidine digluconate, 1% sodium hypochlorite and Corega Tabs). Shear bond strength tests (MPa) were performed with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student-Newman-Keuls' multiple comparisons post hoc analysis (α=.05). The shear bond strength results revealed statistically significant differences between the groups. For the Biotone IPN tooth, significantly lower shear bond strength values were found for the group immersed in sodium-perborate solution (4.48±2.18 MPa) than for the group immersed in distilled water (control group) (10.83±1.84 MPa). For Biotone, significantly higher bond strength values (10.04±3.28 MPa) were found for the group immersed in Corega Tabs than for the control group (5.45±2.93 MPa). The immersion in denture cleanser solutions was more detrimental to the conventional acrylic denture tooth (Biotone) than to the highly cross-linked denture tooth (Biotone IPN). However, this effect was not observed for the groups immersed in Corega Tabs solution, regardless of the type of denture tooth. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Objectives: This study evaluated the microtensile bond strength (MTBS) of non-aged and aged resin-based composites (RBC) (nanohybrid and nanofilled) after two surface conditioning methods, repaired using the composite of the same kind or a microhybrid composite. Materials and methods: Nanohybrid (Tetric EvoCeram-TE) and nanofilled (Filtek Supreme-FS) RBC blocks (5 × 5 × 6 mm) (N = 128) were fabricated and randomly divided into two groups: (a) no ageing (control group) and (b) ageing (5.000 thermocycling, 5-55 °C). RBC surfaces were polished by up to 1,200-grit silicone carbide papers and conditioned with either (a) air abrasion with 30-μm SiO2 particles (CoJet Sand) for 4 s + silane coupling agent (ESPE-Sil) + adhesive resin (VisioBond) (n = 16) or (b) adhesive application only (Multilink A+B for TE; Adper ScotchBond 1XT for FS) (n = 16). In half of the groups, repair resin of the same kind with the RBC and, in the other half, a different kind of composite (microhybrid, Quadrant Anterior Shine-AS) with its corresponding adhesive (Quadrant UniBond) was used. The specimens were submitted to MTBS test (0.5 mm/min). Data were analysed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests. Degree of conversion (DC) of non-aged and aged resin composites (TE, FS) (n = 3 per group) was measured by micro-Raman analyses. Results: RBC type (p = 0.001) and ageing affected the MTBS results significantly (p = 0.001). Surface conditioning type did not show significant difference (p = 0.726), but less number of pre-test failures was experienced with the CoJet system compared to adhesive resin application only. Repair strength on aged TE showed significantly less (p < 0.05) MTBS than for FS. FS repaired with the same kind of RBC and adhesive resin presented the highest cohesive failures (43 %). DC was higher for TE (71 %) than for FS (58 %) before ageing. Conclusion: On the aged RBCs, less favourable repair strength could be expected especially for nanohybrid composite. For repair actions, RBC surface conditioning could be accomplished with either adhesive resin application only or with CoJet system, providing that the latter resulted in less pre-test failures. Clinical relevance: Clinicians could condition the resin surface prior to repair or relayering with either CoJet system or adhesive resin application only, depending on the availability of the system. © 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Resumo:
INTRODUÇÃO: frequentemente, os pacientes ortodônticos apresentam restaurações de resina composta; no entanto, existem poucos estudos que avaliam a melhor forma de colagem ortodôntica nessa situação. OBJETIVO: o objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar a força adesiva de braquetes ortodônticos em restaurações resinosas com tratamento de superfície. MÉTODOS: foram utilizados 51 incisivos inferiores bovinos divididos aleatoriamente em três grupos. No grupo controle (GC), os braquetes foram colados em esmalte dentário; nos grupos experimentais com tratamento (GCT) e sem tratamento (GST), os braquetes foram colados em restauração de resina previamente realizada, diferenciando-se pelo tratamento de superfície com broca diamantada. Os dentes foram incluídos em tubos de PVC com resina acrílica autopolimerizável. O ensaio de cisalhamento foi executado em máquina universal de ensaios Emic. Os grupos foram submetidos à ANOVA com pós-teste de Tukey para verificação da diferença estatística entre os grupos (α = 0,05). RESULTADOS: GC (6,62MPa) e GCT (6,82MPa) apresentaram resultados semelhantes, enquanto o GST (5,07MPa) obteve resultados estatisticamente menores (p < 0,05). CONCLUSÃO: conclui-se que a melhor técnica de colagem de braquetes ortodônticos em restaurações de resina composta é a de realização de desgaste sobre a superfície.
Resumo:
Purpose: To compare the shear bond strength (SBS) of two cements to two Y-TZP ceramics subjected to different surface treatments.Materials and Methods: Zirconia specimens were made from Lava (n = 36) and IPS e.max ZirCAD (n = 36), and their surfaces were treated as follows: no treatment (control), silica coating with 30-mu m silica-modified alumina (Al2O3) particles (CoJet Sand), or coating with liners Lava Ceram for Lava and Intensive ZirLiner for IPS e.max ZirCAD. Composite resin cylinders were bonded to zirconia with Panavia F or RelyX Unicem resin cements. All specimens were thermocycled (6000 cycles at 5 degrees C/55 degrees C) and subjected to SBS testing. Data were analyzed by post-hoc test Tamhane T2 and Scheffe tests (alpha = 0.05). Failure mode was analyzed by stereomicroscope and SEM.Results: With both zirconia brands, CoJet Sand showed significantly higher SBS values than control groups only when used with RelyX Unicem (p = 0.0001). Surface treatment with liners gave higher SBS than control groups with both ceramic brands and cements (p < 0.001). With both zirconia brands, the highest SBS values were obtained with the CoJet and RelyX Unicem combination (> 13.47 MPa). Panavia F cement showed significantly better results when coupled with liner surface treatment rather than with CoJet (p = 0.0001, SBS > 12.23 MPa). In untreated controls, Panavia F showed higher bond strength than RelyX Unicem; the difference was significant (p = 0.016) in IPS e.max ZirCAD. The nontreated specimens and those treated with CoJet Sand exhibited a high percentage of adhesive and mixed A (primarily adhesive) failures, while the specimens treated with liners presented an increase in mixed A and mixed C (primarily cohesive) failures as well as some cohesive failure in the bulk of Lava Ceram for both cements.Conclusion: CoJet Sand and liner application effectively improved the SBS between zirconia and luting cements. This study suggests that different interactions between surface treatments and luting cements yield different SBS: in clinical practice, these interactions should be considered when combining luting cements with surface treatments in order to obtain the maximum bond strength to zirconia restorations.
Resumo:
Adhesive restorations have increasingly been used in dentistry, and the adhesive system application technique may determine the success of the restorative procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the application technique of two adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond and Adper Scotchbond MultiPurpose) on the bond strength and adhesive layer of composite resin restorations. Eight human third molars were selected and prepared with Class I occlusal cavities. The teeth were restored with composite using various application techniques for both adhesives, according to the following groups (n = 10): group 1 (control), systems were applied and adhesive was immediately light activated for 20 seconds without removing excesses; group 2, excess adhesive was removed with a gentle jet of air for 5 seconds; group 3, excess was removed with a dry microbrush-type device; and group 4, a gentle jet of air was applied after the microbrush and then light activation was performed. After this, the teeth were submitted to microtensile testing. For the two systems tested, no statistical differences were observed between groups 1 and 2. Groups 3 and 4 presented higher bond strength values compared with the other studied groups, allowing the conclusion that excess adhesive removal with a dry micro-brush could improve bond strength in composite restorations. Predominance of adhesive fracture and thicker adhesive layer were observed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in groups 1 and 2. For groups 3 and 4, a mixed failure pattern and thinner adhesive layer were verified. Clinicians should be aware that excess adhesive may negatively affect bond strength, whereas a thin, uniform adhesive layer appears to be favorable. (Quintessence Int 2013;44:9-15)
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the microtensile bond strength (MTBS) of ceramic cemented to dentin varying the resin cement and ceramic shades.Materials and Methods: Two VITA VM7 ceramic shades (Base Dentine 0M1 and Base Dentine 5M3) were used. A spectrophotometer was used to determine the percentage translucency of ceramic (thickness: 2.5 mm). For the MTBS test, 80 molar dentin surfaces were etched and an adhesive was applied. Forty blocks (7.2 x 7.2 x 2.5 mm) of each ceramic shade were produced and the ceramic surface was etched (10% hydrofluoric acid) for 60 s, followed by the application of silane and resin cement (A3 yellow and transparent). The blocks were cemented to dentin using either A3 or transparent cement. Specimens were photoactivated for 20 s or 40 s, stored in distilled water (37 degrees C/24 h), and sectioned. Eight experimental groups were obtained (n = 10). Specimens were tested for MTSB using a universal testing machine. Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests (alpha <= 0.05).Results: The percentage translucency of 0M1 and 5M3 ceramics were 10.06 (+/- 0.25)% and 1.34 (+/- 0.02)%, respectively. The lowest MTBS was observed for the ceramic shade 5M3. For the 0M1 ceramic, the A3 yellow cement that was photocured for 20 s exhibited the lowest MTBS, while the transparent cement that was photocured for 40 s presented the highest MTBS.Conclusions: For the 2.5-mm-thick 5M3 ceramic restorations, the MTBS of ceramic cemented to dentin significantly increased. The dual-curing cement Variolink II photocured for 40 s is not recommended for cementing the Base Dentine 5M3 feldspathic ceramic to dentin.
Resumo:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Resumo:
Purpose: This study evaluated the effect of different surface conditioning protocols on the repair strength of resin composite to the zirconia core / veneering ceramic complex, simulating the clinical chipping phenomenon.Materials and Methods: Forty disk-shaped zirconia core (Lava Zirconia, 3M ESPE) (diameter: 3 mm) specimens were veneered circumferentially with a feldspathic veneering ceramic (VM7, Vita Zahnfabrik) (thickness: 2 mm) using a split metal mold. They were then embedded in autopolymerizing acrylic with the bonding surfaces exposed. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of the following surface conditioning protocols (n = 10 per group): group 1, veneer: 4% hydrofluoric acid (HF) (Porcelain Etch) + core: aluminum trioxide (50-mu m Al2O3) + core + veneer: silane (ESPE-Sil); group 2: core: Al2O3 (50 mu m) + veneer: HF + core + veneer: silane; group 3: veneer: HF + core: 30 mu m aluminum trioxide particles coated with silica (30 mu m SiO2) + core + veneer: silane; group 4: core: 30 mu m SiO2 + veneer: HF + core + veneer: silane. Core and veneer ceramic were conditioned individually but no attempt was made to avoid cross contamination of conditioning, simulating the clinical intraoral repair situation. Adhesive resin (VisioBond) was applied to both the core and the veneer ceramic, and resin composite (Quadrant Posterior) was bonded onto both substrates using polyethylene molds and photopolymerized. After thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5 degrees C-55 degrees C), the specimens were subjected to shear bond testing using a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Failure modes were identified using an optical microscope, and scanning electron microscope images were obtained. Bond strength data (MPa) were analyzed statistically using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test followed by the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and the Bonferroni Holm correction (alpha = 0.05).Results: Group 3 demonstrated significantly higher values (MPa) (8.6 +/- 2.7) than those of the other groups (3.2 +/- 3.1, 3.2 +/- 3, and 3.1 +/- 3.5 for groups 1, 2, and 4, respectively) (p < 0.001). All groups showed exclusively adhesive failure between the repair resin and the core zirconia. The incidence of cohesive failure in the ceramic was highest in group 3 (8 out of 10) compared to the other groups (0/10, 2/10, and 2/10, in groups 1, 2, and 4, respectively). SEM images showed that air abrasion on the zirconia core only also impinged on the veneering ceramic where the etching pattern was affected.Conclusion: Etching the veneer ceramic with HF gel and silica coating of the zirconia core followed by silanization of both substrates could be advised for the repair of the zirconia core / veneering ceramic complex.
Resumo:
This study assessed the effect of different etching durations of feldspathic ceramic with hydrofluoric acid (HF) and ultrasonic cleaning of the etched ceramic surface on the microtensile bond strength stability of resin to a feldspathic ceramic. The research hypotheses investigated were: (1) different etching times would not affect the adhesion resistance and (2) ultrasonic cleaning would improve the adhesion. Ceramic blocks (6 x 6 x 5 mm) (N = 48) were obtained. The cementations surfaces were duplicated in resin composite. The six study groups (n = 8) were: G1Etching with 10% aqueous HF (30 s) + silane; G 210% HF (1 min) + silane; G3-10% HF (2 min) + silane; G4-10% HF (30 s) + ultrasonic cleaning (4 min) in distilled water + silane; G5-10% HF (1 min) + ultrasonic cleaning + silane; G6-10% HF (2 min) ultrasonic cleaning + silane. The cemented blocks were sectioned into microbars for the microtensile test. The etching duration did not create significant difference among the groups (p = .156) but significant influence of ultrasonic cleaning was observed (p = .001) (Two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test, p > 0.05). All the groups after ultrasonic cleaning presented higher bond strength (19.38-20.08 MPa) when compared with the groups without ultrasonic cleaning (16.2117.75 MPa). The bond strength between feldspathic ceramic and resin cement was not affected by different etching durations using HF. Ultrasonic cleaning increased the bond strength between ceramic surface and resin cement, regardless of the etching duration.
Resumo:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Resumo:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Resumo:
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of air-abrasion/zirconia sintering order on the yttria partially stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) surface characterization (roughness, morphology, and phase transformation), flexural strength (FS), and shear bond strength (SBS) to a resin cement. Y-TZP specimens were air abraded with 50-μm Al2O3 particles after (AS), before (BS), or before and after zirconia sintering (BAS). For roughness (Ra), 30 block specimens (12×12×3.0 mm; n=10) had their surfaces analyzed by a profilometer. Next, on the air-abraded surfaces of these specimens, composite resin discs (n=30) were bonded with RelyX ARC. The bonded specimens were stored for 24 hours in distilled water at 37°C before shear testing. Failure mode was determined with a stereomicroscope (20×). The surface morphology (n=2) was evaluated by SEM (500×). For the four-point flexural strength test (EMIC DL2000), 39 bar-shaped specimens (20×4.0×1.2 mm; n=13) were air abraded according to the three conditions proposed, and an additional group (nonabraded) was evaluated (n=13). The quantitative analysis of phase transformation (n=1) was completed with Rietveld refinement with X-ray diffraction data. Ra (μm) and SBS (MPa) data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey test (α=0.05). Pearson correlation analysis was used to determine if there was a correlation between roughness and SBS. For FS (MPa) data, one-way ANOVA and the Dunnett C-test (α=0.05) were used. The air-abrasion/zirconia sintering order influenced significantly (p<0.001) Ra, SBS, and FS. The BS and AS groups presented the highest (1.3 μm) and the lowest (0.7 μm) Ra. The highest SBS (7.0 MPa) was exhibited by the BAS group, followed by the AS group (5.4 MPa) and finally by the BS group (2.6 MPa). All groups presented 100% adhesive failure. A weak correlation (r=−0.45, p<0.05) was found between roughness and SBS. The air-abrasion/zirconia sintering order provided differences in the surface morphology. The nonabraded (926.8 MPa) and BS (816.3 MPa) groups exhibited statistically similar FS values but lower values than the AS (1249.1 MPa) and BAS (1181.4 MPa) groups, with no significant difference between them. The nonabraded, AS, BS, and BAS groups exhibited, respectively, percentages of monoclinic phase of 0.0 wt%, 12.2 wt%, 0.0 wt%, and 8.6 wt%. The rougher surface provided by the air-abrasion before zirconia sintering may have impaired the bonding with the resin cement. The morphological patterns were consistent with the surface roughness. Considering the short-term SBS and FS, the BAS group exhibited the best performance. Air abrasion, regardless of its performance order, provides tetragonal to monoclinic transformation, while sintering tends to zero the monoclinic phase content.
Resumo:
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)