IADR Abstract Archives
Shear Bond Strength Between Dentin And Zirconia Or Lithium Disilicate
Methods: Three commercial resin cement systems were chosen for the study: Duolink SE system (Bisco), Multilink System (Ivoclar Vivadent), and RelyX UniCem2 (3M ESPE). Lithium disilicate (Emax) and zirconia ceramics were sectioned into 21 bars (2×2×10mm) each. The surface to be bonded (2×2 mm) of lithium disilicates was etched (25sec, 4%HF Porcelain Etchant). The zirconia surface to be bonded (2×2mm) was lightly sandblasted (0.3MPa, 10sec, 10mm distance) by alumina sand. Dentin was polished by 320-grit SiC paper and rinsed with water. According to manufacturer’s instructions, lithium disilicate (or zirconia) bars were bonded to dentin by one of the three resin cement systems in self-curing modes (37ºC, 15min). The shear bond strength was tested (n=7) on an Instron tester (crosshead speed 5mm/min) after storage in de-ionized water (37ºC, 24 hours). The data were analyzed statistically by one-way ANOVA and Tukey Tests (p<0.05).
Results: The test results are shown in the table below. For each row, means with different letters are statistically different at p < 0.05.
Average Bond Strength, MPa (Standard Deviation) |
Duolink SE |
Multilink |
UniCem2 |
Zirconia-Dentin |
20.6(2.1)a |
16.9(3.8)b |
1.6(0.5)c |
Lithium Disilicate-Dentin |
23.1(5.0)A |
15.2(4.1)B |
7.2(2.7)C |
Conclusions: Duolink SE system had significantly higher bond strength than Multilink System and RelyX UniCem2 (p<0.05). UniCem2 is the more convenient system, but provided the lowest bond strength (lower than 10MPa).