Resin Bonding to a Feldspar Ceramic After Different Ceramic Surface Conditioning Methods: Evaluation of Contact Angle, Surface pH, and Microtensile Bond Strength Durability

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

Effect of surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin composite to composite after aging conditions

Objectives. This study evaluated the effect of two different surface conditioning methods on the repair bond strength of a bis-GMA-adduct/bis-EMA/TEGDMA based resin composite after three aging conditions.Methods. Thirty-six composite resin blocks (Esthet X, Dentsply) were prepared (5 mm x 6 mm x 6 mm) and randomly assigned into three groups for aging process: (a) immersion in citric acid (pH 3.0 at 37 degrees C, 1 week) (CA); (b) boiling in water for 8h (BW) and (c) thermocycling (x5000, 5-55 degrees C, dwell time: 30s) (TC). After aging, the blocks were assigned to one of the following surface conditioning methods: (1) silica coating (30 mu m SiOx) (CoJet, 3M ESPE) + silane (ESPE-Sil) (CJ), (2) phosphoric acid + adhesive resin (Single Bond, 3M ESPE) (PA). Resin composite (Esthet.X (R)) was bonded to the conditioned substrates incrementally and light polymerized. The experimental groups formed were as follows: Gr1:CA + PA; Gr2:CA + CJ Gr3:BW + PA; Gr4: BW + CJ; Gr5:TC + PA; Gr6: TC + CJ. The specimens were sectioned in two axes (x and y) with a diamond disc under coolant irrigation in order to obtain non-trimmed bar specimens (sticks, 10 mm x 1 mm x 1 mm) with 1 mm(2) of bonding area. The microtensile test was accomplished in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 0.5 mm min(-1)).Results. The means and standard deviations of bond strength (MPa +/- S.D.) per group were as follows: Gr1: 25.5 +/- 10.3; Gr2: 46.3 +/- 10.1; Gr3: 21.7 +/- 7.1; Gr4: 52.3 +/- 15.1; GrS: 16.1 +/- 5.1; Gr6, 49.6 +/- 13.5. The silica coated groups showed significantly higher mean bond values after all three aging conditions (p < 0.0001) (two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests, alpha = 0.05). The interaction effect revealed significant influence of TC aging on both silica coated and acid etched groups compared to the other aging methods (p < 0.032). Citric acid was the least aggressive aging medium.Significance. Chairside silica coating and silanization provided higher resin-resin bond strength values compared to acid etching with phosphoric acid followed by adhesive resin applications. Thermocycling the composite substrates resulted in the lowest repair bond strength compared to citric acid challenge or boiling in water. (C) 2006 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Bond strength of acrylic teeth to denture base resin after various surface conditioning methods before and after thermocycling

This study aimed to evaluate the durability of adhesion between acrylic teeth and denture base acrylic resin. The base surfaces of 24 acrylic teeth were flatted and submitted to 4 surface treatment methods: SM1 (control): No SM; SM2: application of a methyl methacrylate-based bonding agent (Vitacol); SM3: air abrasion with 30-μm silicone oxide plus silane; SM4: SM3 plus SM2. A heat-polymerized acrylic resin was applied to the teeth. Thereafter, bar specimens were produced for the microtensile test at dry and thermocyled conditions (60 days water storage followed by 12,000 cycles). The results showed that bond strength was significantly affected by the SM (P < .0001) (SM4 = SM2 > SM3 > SM1) and storage regimens (P < .0001) (dry > thermocycled). The methyl methacrylate-based adhesive showed the highest bond strength.

Comparison of Physicochemical Surface Conditioning Methods for Adhesion of bis-GMA Resin Cement to Particulate Filler Composite and Surface Characterization

This study compared the effect of physicochemical surface conditioning methods on the adhesion of bis-GMA-based resin cement to particulate filler composite (PFC) used for indirect dental restorations. PFC blocks (N (block)=54, n (block)=9 per group) were polymerized and randomly subjected to one of the following surface conditioning methods: a) No conditioning (Control-C), b) Hydrofluoric acid (HF)etching for 60s (AE60), c) HF for 90s (AE90), d) HF for 120s (AE120), e) HF for 180s (AE180), and f) air-abrasion with 30 mu m silica-coated alumina particles (AB). The conditioned surfaces were silanized with an MPS silane, and an adhesive resin was applied. Resin composite blocks were bonded to PFC using resin cement and photo-polymerized. PFC-cement-resin composite blocks were cut under coolant water to obtain bar specimens (1mmx0.8mm). Microtensile bond strength test (mu TBS)was performed in a universal testing machine (1mm/min). After debonding, failure modes were classified using stereomicroscopy. Surface characterization was performed on a set of separate specimen surfaces using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), X-Ray Dispersive Spectroscopy (XDS), X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS), and Fourier Transform-Raman Spectroscopy (FT-RS). Mean mu TBS (MPa) of C (35.6 +/- 4.9) was significantly lower than those of other groups (40.2 +/- 5.6-47.4 +/- 6.1) (p<0.05). The highest mu TBS was obtained in Group AB (47.4 +/- 6.1). Prolonged duration of HF etching increased the results (AE180: 41.9 +/- 7), but was not significantly different than that of AB (p>0.05). Failure types were predominantly cohesive in PFC (34 out of 54) followed by cohesive failure in the cement (16 out of 54). Degree of conversion (DC) of the PFC was 63 +/- 10%. SEM analysis showed increased irregularities on PFC surfaces with the increased etching time. Chemical surface analyses with XPS and FT-RS indicated 11-70% silane on the PFC surfaces that contributed to improved bond strength compared to Group C that presented 5% silane, which seemed to be a threshold. Group AB displayed 83% SiO2 and 17% silane on the surfaces.

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.

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.

Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to glass infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic: The effect of surface conditioning

This study evaluated the effect of three surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of resin cement to a glass-infiltrated zirconia-reinforced alumina-based core ceramic. Thirty blocks (5×5×4 mm) of In-Ceram Zirconia ceramics (In-Ceram Zirconia-INC-ZR, VITA) were fabricated according to the manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in resin composite. The specimens were polished and assigned to one of the following three treatment conditions (n=10): (1) Airborne particle abrasion with 110 μm Al2O3 particles + silanization, (2) Silica coating with 110 μm SiOx particles (Rocatec Pre and Plus, 3M ESPE) + silanization, (3) Silica coating with 30 μm SiOx particles (CoJet, 3M ESPE) + silanization. The ceramic-composite blocks were cemented with the resin cement (Panavia F) and stored at 37 °C in distilled water for 7 days prior to bond tests. The blocks were cut under coolant water to produce bar specimens with a bonding area of approximately 0.6 mm2. The bond strength tests were performed in a universal testing machine (cross-head speed: 1 mm/min). The mean bond strengths of the specimens of each block were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test (α≤0.05). Silica coating with silanization either using 110 μm SiOx or 30 μm SiOx particles increased the bond strength of the resin cement (24.6±2.7 MPa and 26.7±2.4 MPa, respectively) to the zirconia-based ceramic significantly compared to that of airborne particle abrasion with 110-μm Al2O3 (20.5±3.8 MPa) (ANOVA, P<0.05). Conditioning the INC-ZR ceramic surfaces with silica coating and silanization using either chairside or laboratory devices provided higher bond strengths of the resin cement than with airborne particle abrasion using 110 μm Al2O3. © 2005 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Bond strength of a resin cement to high-alumina and zirconia-reinforced ceramics: The effect of surface conditioning

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two surface conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to three high-strength core ceramics: high alumina-based (In-Ceram Alumina, Procera AllCeram) and zirconia-reinforced alumina-based (In-Ceram Zirconia) ceramics. Materials and Methods: Ten blocks (5 ×6 × 8 mm) of In-Ceram Alumina (AL), In-Ceram Zirconia (ZR), and Procera (PR) ceramics were fabricated according to each manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in composite. The specimens were assigned to one of the two following treatment conditions: (1) airborne particle abrasion with 110-μm Al2O3 particles + silanization, (2) silica coating with 30 μm SiOx particles (CoJet, 3M ESPE) + silanization. Each ceramic block was duplicated in composite resin (W3D-Master, Wilcos, Petrópolis, RJ, Brazil) using a mold made out of silicon impression material. Composite resin layers were incrementally condensed into the mold to fill up the mold and each layer was light polymerized for 40 s. The composite blocks were bonded to the surface-conditioned ceramic blocks using a resin cement system (Panavia F, Kuraray, Okayama, Japan). One composite resin block was fabricated for each ceramic block. The ceramic-composite was stored at 37°C in distilled water for 7 days prior to bond tests. The blocks were cut under water cooling to produce bar specimens (n = 30) with a bonding area of approximately 0.6 mm2. The bond strength tests were performed in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 1 mm/min). Bond strength values were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (≤ 0.05). Results: Silica coating with silanization increased the bond strength significantly for all three high-strength ceramics (18.5 to 31.2 MPa) compared to that of airborne particle abrasion with 110-μm Al2O3 (12.7-17.3 MPa) (ANOVA, p < 0.05). PR exhibited the lowest bond strengths after both Al2O3 and silica coating (12.7 and 18.5 MPa, respectively). Conclusion: Conditioning the high-strength ceramic surfaces with silica coating and silanization provided higher bond strengths of the resin cement than with airborne particle abrasion with 110-μm Al2O3 and silanization.

Bond strength durability of direct and indirect composite systems following surface conditioning for repair

Purpose: This study evaluated the effect of surface conditioning methods and thermocycling on the bond strength between a resin composite and an indirect composite system in order to test the repair bond strength. Materials and Methods: Eighteen blocks (5 x 5 x 4 mm) of indirect resin composite (Sinfony) were fabricated according to the manufacturer's instructions. The specimens were randomly assigned to one of the following two treatment conditions (9 blocks per treatment): (1) 10% hydrofluoric acid (HF) for 90 s (Dentsply) + silanization, (2) silica coating with 30-Ìm SiOx particles (CoJet) + silanization. After surface conditioning, the bonding agent was applied (Adper Single Bond) and light polymerized. The composite resin (W3D Master) was condensed and polymerized incrementally to form a block. Following storage in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h, the indirect composite/resin blocks were sectioned in two axes (x and y) with a diamond disk under coolant irrigation to obtain nontrimmed specimens (sticks) with approximately 0.6 mm2 of bonding area. Twelve specimens were obtained per block (N = 216, n = 108 sticks). The specimens from each repaired block were again randomly divided into 2 groups and tested either after storage in water for 24 h or thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C). The microtensile bond strength test was performed in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 1 mm/min). The mean bond strengths of the specimens of each block were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results: Both surface conditioning (p = 0.0001) and storage conditions (p = 0.0001) had a significant effect on the results. After 24 h water storage, silica coating and silanization (method 2) showed significantly higher bond strength results (46.4 ± 13.8 MPa) than that of hydrofluoric acid etching and silanization (method 1) (35.8 ± 9.7 MPa) (p < 0.001). After thermocycling, no significant difference was found between the mean bond strengths obtained with method 1 (34.1 ± 8.9 MPa) and method 2 (31.9 ± 7.9 MPa) (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Although after 24 h of testing, silica coating and silanization performed significantly better in resin-resin repair bond strength, both HF acid gel and silica coating followed by silanization revealed comparable bond strength results after thermocycling for 6000 times.

Surface conditioning of a composite used for inlay/onlay restorations: Effect on μTBS 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 × 6 × 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-l̀m Al2O3 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°C and then sectioned to produce nontrimmed beam samples, which were submitted to microtensile bond strength testing (μTBS). 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: μTBS 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-l̀m Al2O3 or tribochemical silica coating allowed bonding between resin and composite that was statistically similar and stronger than conditioning with acid etching.

Adhesion between fiber post and root dentin: evaluation of post surface conditioning for bond strength improvement.

The aim of this paper was to evaluate two surface conditioning methods associated with the application of adhesive on the post surface for improving the bond to resin cement. Sixty single-rooted bovine teeth were sectioned at 16 mm in length, prepared (9 mm depth), embedded in a PVC cylinder using acrylic resin, and allocated into 3 groups (N.=20) according to post surface treatment: cleaning with ethanol (control group); etching with hydrogen peroxide; etching with hydrofluoric acid. Ten posts for each group were silanized and other 10 posts were silanized and received an adhesive agent. The posts were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U100 resin cement). All teeth were sectioned perpendicularly to the long axis (2 mm thickness per slice), submitted to push out bond strength testing and the type of failure was recorded. The obtained data were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Turkey's test, with the level of significance set at 5%. Neither the hydrofluoric acid or hydrogen peroxide post surface treatment, nor the adhesive application, had an influence on bond strength values. The main type of failure was adhesive between cement and dentin. Etching and the application of an adhesive on the post surface did not presented a significant influence on the bond strength results for the fiber post resin cement-root dentin assembly. The cement appears to adhere very well to the fiber post surface rather than the dentin surface.

Repair bond strength of microhybrid, nanohybrid and nanofilled resin composites: Effect of substrate resin type, surface conditioning and ageing

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.

INFLUENCE of DIFFERENT SURFACE CONDITIONING PROTOCOLS on MICROTENSILE BOND STRENGTH of SELF-ADHESIVE RESIN CEMENTS TO DENTIN

Statement of problem. According to manufacturers, bonding with self-adhesive resin cements can be achieved without any pretreatment steps such as etching, priming, or bonding. However, the benefit of saving time with these simplified luting systems may be realized at the expense of compromising the bonding capacity.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to assess whether different dentin conditioning protocols influence the bond performance of self-adhesive resin cements to dentin.Material and methods. Flat dentin surfaces from 48 human molars were divided into 4 groups (n=12): 1) control, no conditioning; 2) H(3)PO(4), etching with 37% H(3)PO(4) for 15 seconds; 3) SEBond, bonding with self-etching primer adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond); and 4) EDTA, etching with 0.1M EDTA for 60 seconds. The specimens from each dentin pre-treatment were bonded using the self-adhesive cements RelyX Unicem, Maxcem or Multilink Sprint (n=4). The resin-cement-dentin specimens were stored in water at 37 degrees C for 7 days, and serially sectioned to produce beam specimens of 1.0 mm(2) cross-sectional area. Microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) testing was performed at 1.0 mm/min. Data (MPa) were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparisons test (alpha=.05). Fractured specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope (x40) and classified as adhesive, mixed, or cohesive. Additional bonded interfaces were evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).Results. Cement-dentin mu TBS was affected by the dentin conditioning approach (P <.001). RelyX Unicem attained statistically similar bond strengths to all pre-treated dentin surfaces. H(3)PO(4)-etching prior to the application of Maxcem resulted in bond strength values that were significantly higher than the other groups. The lowest mu TBS were attained when luting Multilink Sprint per manufacturers' recommendations, while H(3)PO(4)-etching produced the highest values followed by Clearfil SE bonding and EDTA. SEM observations disclosed an enhanced potential of the self-adhesive cements to form a hybrid layer when applied following manufacturer's instructions.Conclusions. When evaluated self-adhesive resin cements are used, selectively etching dentin with H(3)PO(4) prior to luting results in the most effective bonding. (J Prosthet Dent 2011;105:227-235)

Influence of ceramic surface conditioning and resin cements on microtensile bond strength to a glass ceramic

Statement of problem. It is not clear how different glass ceramic surface pretreatments influence the bonding capacity of various luting agents to these surfaces.Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (mu TBS) of 3 resin cements to a lithia disilicate-based ceramic submitted to 2 surface conditioning treatments.Material and methods. Eighteen 5 X 6 X 8-mm ceramic (IPS Empress 2) blocks were fabricated according to manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in composite resin (Tetric Ceram). Ceramic blocks were polished and divided into 2 groups (n=9/treatment): no conditioning (no-conditioning/control), or 5% hydrofluoric acid etching for 20 seconds and silanization for 1 minute (HF + SIL). Ceramic blocks were cemented to the composite resin blocks with I self-adhesive universal resin cement (RelyX Unicem) or 1 of 2 resin-based luting agents (Multilink or Panavia F), according to the manufacturer's instructions. The composite resin-ceramic blocks were stored in humidity at 37 degrees C for 7 days and serially sectioned to produce 25 beam specimens per group with a 1.0-mm(2) cross-sectional area. Specimens were thermal cycled (5000 cycles, 5 degrees C-55 degrees C) and tested in tension at 1 mm/min. Microtensile bond strength data (MPa) were analyzed by 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparisons tests (alpha=.05). Fractured specimens were examined with a stereomicroscope (X40) and classified as adhesive, mixed, or cohesive.Results. The surface conditioning factor was significant (HF+SIL > no-conditioning) (P<.0001). Considering the unconditioned groups, the mu TBS of RelyX Unicem was significantly higher (9.6 +/- 1.9) than that of Multilink (6.2 +/- 1.2) and Panavia F (7.4 +/- 1.9). Previous etching and silanization yielded statistically higher mu TBS values for RelyX Unicem (18.8 +/- 3.5) and Multilink (17.4 +/- 3.0) when compared to Panavia F (15.7 +/- 3.8). Spontaneous debonding after thermal cycling was detected when luting agents were applied to untreated ceramic surfaces.Conclusion. Etching and silanization treatments appear to be crucial for resin bonding to a lithia disilicate-based ceramic, regardless of the resin cement used.

Microtensile bond strength between a quartz fiber post and a resin cement: Effect of post surface conditioning

Purpose: To test the bond strength between a quartz-fiber-reinforced composite post (FRC) and a resin cement. The null hypothesis was that the bond strength can be increased by using a chairside tribochemical silica-coating system. Materials and Methods: Thirty quartz-FRCs (Light-Post) were divided into 3 groups according to the post surface treatment: G1) Conditioning with 32% phosphoric acid (1 min), applying a silane coupling agent; G2) etching with 10% hydrofluoric acid (1 min), silane application; G3) chairside tribochemical silica coating method (CoJet System): air abrasion with 30-μ SiO x-modified Al2O3 particles, silane application. Thereafter, the posts were cemented into a cylinder (5 mm diameter, 15 mm height) with a resin cement (Duo-Link). After cementation, the specimens were stored in distilled water (37°C/24 h) and sectioned along the x and y axes with a diamond wheel under cooling (Lab-cut 1010) to create nontrimmed bar specimens. Each specimen was attached with cyanoacrylate to an apparatus adapted for the microtensile test. Microtensile testing was conducted on a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). The data obtained were submitted to the one-way ANOVA and Tukey test (α = 0.05). Results: A significant influence of the conditioning methods was observed (p < 0.0001). The bond strength of G3 (15.14 ± 3.3) was significantly higher than the bond strengths of G1 (6.9 ± 2.3) and G2 (12.60 ± 2.8) (p = 0.000106 and p = 0.002631, respectively). Notwithstanding the groups, all the tested specimens showed adhesive failure between the resin cement and FRC. Conclusion: The chairside tribochemical system yielded the highest bond strength between resin cement and quartz-fiber post. The null hypothesis was accepted (p < 0.0001).