Resin microtensile bond strength to feldspathic ceramic: Hydrofluoric acid etching vs tribochemical silica coating

This study aimed to compare the microtensile bond strength of resin cement to alumina-reinforced feldspathic ceramic submitted to acid etching or chairside tribochemical silica coating. Ten blocks of Vitadur-α were randomly divided into 2 groups according to conditioning method: (1) etching with 9.6% hydrofluoric acid or (2) chairside tribochemical silica coating. Each ceramic block was luted to the corresponding resin composite block with the resin cement (Panavia F). Next, bar specimens were produced for microtensile testing. No significant difference was observed between the 2 experimental groups (Student t test, P> .05). Both surface treatments showed similar microtensile bond strength values.

Effect of silica coating combined to a MDP-based primer on the resin bond to Y-TZP ceramic

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of silica coating and 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP)-based primer applications upon the bonding durability of a MDP-based resin cement to a yttrium stabilized tetragonal zirconia (Y-TZP) ceramic. Ninety-six Y-TZP tabs were embedded in an acrylic resin (free surface for adhesion: 5 x 5 mm(2)), ground finished and randomly divided into four groups (N = 24) according to the ceramic surface conditioning: (1) cleaning with isopropanol (ALC); (2) ALC + phosphoric acid etching + MDP-based primer application (MDP-primer); (3) silica coating + 3-methacryloyloxypropyl trimethoxysilane (MPS)-based coupling agent application (SiO(2) + MPS-Sil); and (4) SiO(2) + MDP-primer. The MDP-based resin cement was applied on the treated surface using a cylindrical mold (diameter=3 mm). Half of the specimens from each surface conditioning were stored in distilled water (37 C, 24 h) before testing. Another half of the specimens were stored (90 days) and thermo-cycled (12,000x) during this period (90d/TC) before testing. A shear bond strength (SBS) test was performed at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Two factors composed the experimental design: ceramic conditioning strategy (in four levels) and storage condition (in two levels), totaling eight groups. After 90d/TC (Tukey; p < 0.05), SiO(2) + MDP-primer (24.40 MPa) promoted the highest SBS. The ALC and MDP-primer groups debonded spontaneously during 90d/TC. Bonding values were higher and more stable in the SiO2 groups. The use of MDP-primer after silica coating increased the bond strength. (C) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part 8: Appl Biomater 95B: 69-74, 2010.

Effect of silica coating on flexural strength of fiber posts

Purpose: Fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) posts can be air-abraded to obtain good attachment to the resin cement. This study tested the effect of silica coating on the flexural strength of carbon, opaque, and translucent quartz FRC posts. Materials and Methods: Six experimental groups of FRC posts (n = 10 per group) were tested, either as received from the manufacturer or after chairside silica coating (30-μm CoJet-Sand). Results: There was no significant difference in the flexural strength of nonconditioned (504 to 525 MPa) and silica-coated (514 to 565 MPa) specimens (P > .05) (analysis of variance). The type of post did have a significant effect on flexural strength (P < .05). Conclusion: Chairside silica coating did not affect the flexural strength of both carbon and quartz FRC posts.

Silica coating on alumina ceramic: comparison of three chairside air-abrasion devices working for different times and distances.

This study evaluated, by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and EDS, the effect of different strategies for silica coating (sandblasters, time and distance) of a glass-infiltrated ceramic (In-Ceram Alumina). Forty-one ceramic blocks were produced. For comparison of the three air-abrasion devices, 15 ceramic samples were divided in three groups (N.=5): Bioart, Microetcher and Ronvig (air-abrasion parameters: 20 s at a distance of 10 mm). For evaluation of the time and distance factors, ceramic samples (N.=5) were allocated in groups considering three applied times (5 s, 13 s and 20 s) and two distances (10 mm and 20 mm), using the Ronvig device. In a control sample, no surface treatment was performed. After that, the micro-morphologic analyzes of the ceramic surfaces were made using SEM. EDS analyzes were carried out to detect the % of silica on representative ceramic surface. ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to analyze the results. One-way ANOVA showed the silica deposition was different for different devices (P=0.0054). The Ronvig device promoted the highest silica coating compared to the other devices (Tukey test). Two-way ANOVA showed the distance and time factors did not affect significantly the silica deposition (application time and distance showed no statistical difference). The Ronvig device provided the most effective silica deposition on glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic surface and the studied time and distance for air-abrasion did not affect the silica coating.

Shear bond strength of resin cement bonded to alumina ceramic after treatment by aluminum oxide sandblasting or silica coating

Purpose: To evaluate the shear bond strength and bond durability between a dual-cured resin cement (RC) and a high alumina ceramic (In-Ceram Alumina), subjected to two surface treatments. Materials and Methods: Forty disc-shaped specimens (sp) (4-mm diameter, 5-mm thick) were fabricated from In-Ceram Alumina and divided into two groups (n = 20) in accordance with surface treatment: (1) sandblasting by aluminum oxide particles (50 μm Al 2O 3) (SB) and (2) silica coating (30 μm SiO x) using the CoJet system (SC). After the 40 sp were bonded to the dual-cured RC, they were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours. After this period, the sp from each group were divided into two conditions of storage (n = 10): (a) 24 h-shear bond test 24 hours after cementation; (b) Aging-thermocycling (TC) (12,000 times, 5 to 55°C) and water storage (150 days). The shear test was performed in a universal test machine (1 mm/min). Results: ANOVA and Tukey (5%) tests noted no statistically significant difference in the bond strength values between the two surface treatments (p= 0.7897). The bond strengths (MPa) for both surface treatments reduced significantly after aging (SB-24: 8.2 ± 4.6; SB-Aging: 3.7 ± 2.5; SC-24: 8.6 ± 2.2; SC-Aging: 3.5 ± 3.1). Conclusion: Surface conditioning using airborne particle abrasion with either 50 μm alumina or 30 μm silica particles exhibited similar bond strength values and decreased after long-term TC and water storage for both methods. © 2011 by The American College of Prosthodontists.

Effect of conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of phosphate monomer-based cement on zirconia ceramic in dry and aged conditions

The objective of this study was to evaluate the durability of bond strength between a resin cement and aluminous ceramic submitted to various surface conditioning methods. Twenty-four blocks (5 X 5 X 4 mm 3) of a glass-in filtrated zirconia-alumina ceramic (inCeram Zirconia Classic) were randomly divided into three surface treatment groups: ST1-Air-abrasion with 110-mu m Al2O3 particles + silanization; ST2-Laboratory tribochemical silica coating method (110-mu m Al2O3, ilO-PM Silica) (Rocatec) + silanization; ST3-Chairside tribochemical silica coating method (30-mu m SiOx) (CoJet) + silanization. Each treated ceramic block was placed in its silicone mold with the treated surface exposed. The resin cement (Panavia F) was prepared and injected into the mold over the treated surface. Specimens were sectioned to achieve nontrimmed bar specimens (14 sp/block) that were randomly divided into two conditions: (a) Dry-microtensile test after sectioning; (b) Thermocycling (TC)-(6,000X, 5-55 degrees C) and water storage (150 days). Thus, six experimental groups were obtained (11 = 50): Gr1-ST1 + dry; Gr2-ST1 + TC. Gr3-ST2 + dry; Gr4-ST2 + TC; Gr5-ST3 + dry; Gr6ST3 + TC. After microtensile testing, the failure types were noted. ST2 (25.1 +/- 11) and ST3 (24.1 +/- 7.4) presented statistically higher bond strength (MPa) than that of STI (17.5 +/- 8) regardless of aging conditions (p < 0.0001). While Gr2 revealed the lowest results (13.3 +/- 6.4), the other groups (21.7 +/- 7.4-25. 9 +/- 9.1) showed statistically no significant differences (two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test, a 0.05). The majority of the failures were mixed (82%) followed by adhesive failures (18%). Gr2 presented significantly higher incidence of ADHESIVE failures (54%) than those of other groups (p = 0.0001). Both laboratory and chairside silica coating plus silanization showed durable bond strength. After aging, airabrasion with 110-mu m Al2O3 + silanization showed the largest decrease indicating that aging is fundamental for bond strength testing for acid-resistant Arconia ceramics in order to estimate their long-term performance in the mouth. (c) 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Influence of Y-TZP ceramic treatment and different resin cements on bond strength to dentin

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

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.

Repair bond strength of a resin composite to alumina-reinforced feldspathic ceramic

This study compared the microtensile bond strength of a repair resin to an alumina-reinforced feldspathic ceramic (Vitadur-alpha, Vita) after 3 surface conditioning methods: Group 1, etching with 9.6% hydrofluoric acid for 1 minute plus rinsing and drying, followed by application of silane for 5 minutes; group 2, airborne particle abrasion with 110-mm aluminum oxide using a chairside air-abrasion device followed by silane application for 5 minutes; group 3, chairside tribochemical silica coating with 30-mu m SiOx followed by silane application for 5 minutes (N = 30). Group 1 presented the highest mean bond strength (19.7 +/- 3.8 MPa), which was significantly higher than those of groups 2 (10 +/- 2.6 MPa) and 3 (10.4 +/- 4 MPa) (P <.01). Scanning electron microscope analysis of the failure modes demonstrated predominantly mixed types of failures, with adhesive and/or cohesive failures in all experimental groups.

The effect of ceramic surface treatment on bonding to densely sintered alumina ceramic

Statement of problem. Ceramic surface treatment is crucial for bonding to resin. High crystalline ceramics are poorly conditioned using traditional procedures.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of silica coating on a densely sintered alumina ceramic relative to its bond strength to composite, using a resin luting agent.Material and methods. Blocks (6 X 6 X 5 mm) of ceramic and composite were made. The ceramic (Procera AllCeram) surfaces were polished, and the blocks were divided into 3 groups (n = 5): SB, airborne-particle abrasion with 110-mu m Al(2)O(3); RS, silica coating using Rocatec System; and CS, silica coating using CoJet System. The treated ceramic blocks were luted to the composite (W3D Master) blocks using a resin luting agent (Panavia F). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 7 days and then Cut in 2 axes, x and y, to obtain specimens with a bonding area of approximately 0.6 mm(2) (n = 30). The specimens were loaded to failure in tension in a universal testing machine, and data were statistically analyzed using a randomized complete block design analysis of variance and Tukey's test (alpha=.05). Fractured surfaces were examined using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy to determine the type of failure. Energy-dispersive spectroscopy was used for surface compositional analysis.Results. Mean bond strength values (MPa) of Groups RS (17.1 +/- 3.9) (P = .00015) and CS (18.5 +/- 4.7) (P=.00012) were significantly higher than the values of Group SB (12.7 +/- 2.6). There was no statistical difference between Groups RS and CS. All failures occurred at the adhesive zone.Conclusion. Tribochemical silica coating systems increased the tensile bond strength values between Panavia F and Procera AllCeram ceramic.

Surface conditioning of a composite used for inlay/onlay restorations: Effect on mu TBS to resin cement

Purpose: To assess the effect of the composite surface conditioning on the microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to a composite used for inlay/onlay restorations.Materials and Methods: Forty-two blocks (6 x 6 x 4 mm) of a microfilled composite (Vita VMLC) were produced and divided into 3 groups (N = 14) by composite surface conditioning methods: Gr1 - etching with 37% phosphoric acid, washing, drying, silanization; Gr2 - air abrasion with 50-Im Al203 particles, silanization; Gr3 - chairside tribochemiCal silica coating (CoJet System), silanization. Single-Bond (one-step adhesive) was applied on the conditioned surfaces and the two resin blocks treated with the same method were cemented using RelyX ARC (dual-curing resin cement). The specimens were stored for 7 days in water at 37 degrees C and then sectioned to produce nontrimmed beam samples, which were submitted to microtensile bond strength testing (mu TBS). For statistical analysis (one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test, = 0.05), the means of the beam samples from each luted specimen were calculated (n = 7).Results: mu TBS values (MPa) of Gr2 (62.0 +/- 3.9a) and Gr3 (60.5 +/- 7.9a) were statistically similar to each other and higher than Gr1 (38.2 +/- 8.9b). The analysis of the fractured surfaces revealed that all failures occurred at the adhesive zone.Conclusion: Conditioning methods with 50-Im Al203 or tribochemical silica coating allowed bonding between resin and composite that was statistically similar and stronger than conditioning with acid etching.

Composite Resin to Yttria Stabilized Tetragonal Zirconia Polycrystal Bonding: Comparison of Repair Methods

Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate different approaches for bonding composite to the surface of yttria stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) ceramics.Methods: One hundred Y-TZP blocks were embedded in acrylic resin, had the free surface polished, and were randomly divided into 10 groups (n=10). The tested repair approaches included four surface treatments: tribochemical silica coating (TBS), methacryloxydecyldihidrogenphosphate (MDP)-containing primer/silane, sandblasting, and metal/zirconia primer. Alcohol cleaning was used as a "no treatment" control. Surface treatment was followed by the application (or lack thereof) of an MDP-containing resin cement liner. Subsequently, a composite resin was applied to the ceramic surface using a cylindrical mold (4-mm diameter). After aging for 60 days in water storage, including 6000 thermal cycles, the specimens were submitted to a shear test. Analysis of variance and the Tukey test were used for statistical analyses (alpha=0.05).Results: Surface treatment was a statistically significant factor (F=85.42; p<0.0001). The application of the MDP-containing liner had no effect on bond strength (p=0.1017). TBS was the only treatment that had a significantly positive effect on bond strength after aging.Conclusion: Considering the evaluated approaches, TBS seems to be the best surface treatment for Y-TZP composite repairs. The use of an MDP-containing liner between the composite and Y-TZP surfaces is not effective.

Adhesive Quality of Self-adhesive and Conventional Adhesive Resin Cement to Y-TZP Ceramic Before and After Aging Conditions

Purpose: This study evaluated the adhesive quality of simplified self-adhesive and conventional resin cements to Y-TZP in dry and aged conditions. Methods: Y-TZP ceramic blocks (N=192) (5 x 5 x 2 mm) were embedded in acrylic resin and randomly divided into two groups, based on surface conditioning: 96% isopropanol or chairside tribochemical silica coating and silanization. Conditioned ceramics were divided into four groups to receive the resin cements (Panavia F 2.0, Variolink II, RelyX U100 and Maxcem). After 24 hours, half of the specimens (n=12) from each group were submitted to shear bond strength testing (0.5 nun/minute). The remaining specimens were tested after 90 days of water storage at 37 degrees C and thermocycling (12,000x, 5 degrees C-55 degrees C). Failure types were then assessed. The data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA and the Tukey's test (alpha=0.05). Results: Significant effects of ceramic conditioning, cement type and storage conditions were observed (p<0.0001). The groups cleaned using alcohol only showed low bond strength values in dry conditions and the bond strength was reduced dramatically after aging. Groups conditioned using silica coating and silanization showed higher bond strengths both in dry and aged conditions. A high number of specimens failed prematurely prior to testing when they were cleaned using 96% isopropanol. Conclusion: Overall, silica coating and silanization showed higher, stable bond strengths with and without aging. The durability of resin-ceramic adhesion varied, depending on the adhesive cement type.