IADR Abstract Archives
Shear Bond Strength of Self-adhesive Cement with Contemporary Oxide Ceramic
Objectives: The new oxide ceramic restorative (OCR) material (IPS e.max® ZirCAD Prime) has been developed with unique composition of three zones - 3Y-TZP, 5Y-TZP and gradient zone. Therefore, the objective of the study was to measure and compare immediate and aged in vitro shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement with contemporary OCR and lithium disilicate glass ceramic (LDGC) restorative material.
Methods: The oxide ceramic restorative material (IPS e.max® ZirCAD Prime/A2) and LDGC (IPS e.max® CAD/HT/A2) were sectioned, mounted and ground to a flat surface (320/400/600 grid SiC polishing paper). Specimens (n=10) were randomly divided into ten experimental groups. Pre-cured resin composite (Tetric® EvoCeram Bulk Fill/(IVA)) rods (RCR)/(Diameter-2.38mm) were prepared and sand-abraded (Al2O3/50 μm/15 psi). The surfaces were treated per table-1 followed by cementation of pre-cured composite rods using a self-adhesive resin cement (SpeedCEM® Plus) under constant load of 483 grams.
The cement was light cured using Bluephase® PowerCure light (High Power Mode, Irradiance 1,200 ± 10% mW/cm2) for 20s (10s/side). All the experimental groups were stored in the incubator (37°C/100% humidity) for 24 hours. Additionally, groups-1(T),2(T),3(T),4(T),5(T) were aged by thermocycling (50C/550C/30s dwell time/5,000 cycles) after incubation. Each specimen was tested in the Instron® Universal Testing Machine with a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Data was analyzed by One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test (α=0.05).
Results: Shear bond strengths (Mean±SD)/(MPa) were obtained (Table 1). Similar superscripts showed no significant difference.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of the study, no significant difference in the shear bond strength was observed between different oxide ceramic zones or between restorative materials when treated per manufacturer's recommendation.
Methods: The oxide ceramic restorative material (IPS e.max® ZirCAD Prime/A2) and LDGC (IPS e.max® CAD/HT/A2) were sectioned, mounted and ground to a flat surface (320/400/600 grid SiC polishing paper). Specimens (n=10) were randomly divided into ten experimental groups. Pre-cured resin composite (Tetric® EvoCeram Bulk Fill/(IVA)) rods (RCR)/(Diameter-2.38mm) were prepared and sand-abraded (Al2O3/50 μm/15 psi). The surfaces were treated per table-1 followed by cementation of pre-cured composite rods using a self-adhesive resin cement (SpeedCEM® Plus) under constant load of 483 grams.
The cement was light cured using Bluephase® PowerCure light (High Power Mode, Irradiance 1,200 ± 10% mW/cm2) for 20s (10s/side). All the experimental groups were stored in the incubator (37°C/100% humidity) for 24 hours. Additionally, groups-1(T),2(T),3(T),4(T),5(T) were aged by thermocycling (50C/550C/30s dwell time/5,000 cycles) after incubation. Each specimen was tested in the Instron® Universal Testing Machine with a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/min. Data was analyzed by One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test (α=0.05).
Results: Shear bond strengths (Mean±SD)/(MPa) were obtained (Table 1). Similar superscripts showed no significant difference.
Conclusions: Within the limitation of the study, no significant difference in the shear bond strength was observed between different oxide ceramic zones or between restorative materials when treated per manufacturer's recommendation.
IMAGES
3328133_File000000.JPG
3328133_File000000.JPG