IADR Abstract Archives
Influence of Cement and Zirconia surface Pre-treatment on Bonding
Objectives: To compare the effect of mechanical and/or chemical pre-treatments and type of cement on bonding between zirconia and composite cements.
Methods: Two different sizes of zirconia disks (diameter 10 mm, 4.5 mm thickness and diameter 5 mm, 4.5 mm thickness, n=315 each) were fabricated and divided into 7 groups as follows: (i) alumina air abrasion with G-Multi primer and G-Cem Linkforce cement; (ii) alumina air abrasion with Clearfil Ceramic primer and Panavia F2.0 cement; (iii) alumina air abrasion with Multilink Speed cement; (iv) Cojet with RelyX Ceramic primer and RelyX Unicem 2 cement; (v) alumina coating with RelyX Unicem 2 cement; (vi) DCMHotbond® coating followed by alumina air abrasion, hydrofluoric acid, G-Multi primer and G-Cem Linkforce cement; (vii) lithium disilicate coating followed by hydrofluoric acid, Monobond N primer, and Multilink Speed cement. In each group, two different sizes of identically pre-treated zirconia specimens were cemented together and stored in distilled water for 24 hours and then divided into 3 aging conditions (n=15): (i) immediate, (ii) thermocycling for 5,000 cycles, and (iii) thermocycling for 10,000 cycles. The specimens were then tested in shear mode. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test followed by multiple pairwise comparisons.
Results: Specimens coated with lithium disilicate followed by hydrofluoric acid, Monobond N primer, and Multilink Speed cement recorded the highest bond strength among all test groups for all aging conditions. Thermocycling did not affect the bond strength of the great majority of the groups.
This study suggests that mechanical/chemical preparations and type of cement contribute to the bond strength of composite resin to zirconia. However, the contribution of each single factor may be offset by the effect of another factor.
Conclusions: Type of mechanical and/or chemical pre-treatments, and type of cement affect the shear bond strength between zirconia and composite cements. However, more studies are necessary to understand the contribution of each factor.
Methods: Two different sizes of zirconia disks (diameter 10 mm, 4.5 mm thickness and diameter 5 mm, 4.5 mm thickness, n=315 each) were fabricated and divided into 7 groups as follows: (i) alumina air abrasion with G-Multi primer and G-Cem Linkforce cement; (ii) alumina air abrasion with Clearfil Ceramic primer and Panavia F2.0 cement; (iii) alumina air abrasion with Multilink Speed cement; (iv) Cojet with RelyX Ceramic primer and RelyX Unicem 2 cement; (v) alumina coating with RelyX Unicem 2 cement; (vi) DCMHotbond® coating followed by alumina air abrasion, hydrofluoric acid, G-Multi primer and G-Cem Linkforce cement; (vii) lithium disilicate coating followed by hydrofluoric acid, Monobond N primer, and Multilink Speed cement. In each group, two different sizes of identically pre-treated zirconia specimens were cemented together and stored in distilled water for 24 hours and then divided into 3 aging conditions (n=15): (i) immediate, (ii) thermocycling for 5,000 cycles, and (iii) thermocycling for 10,000 cycles. The specimens were then tested in shear mode. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test followed by multiple pairwise comparisons.
Results: Specimens coated with lithium disilicate followed by hydrofluoric acid, Monobond N primer, and Multilink Speed cement recorded the highest bond strength among all test groups for all aging conditions. Thermocycling did not affect the bond strength of the great majority of the groups.
This study suggests that mechanical/chemical preparations and type of cement contribute to the bond strength of composite resin to zirconia. However, the contribution of each single factor may be offset by the effect of another factor.
Conclusions: Type of mechanical and/or chemical pre-treatments, and type of cement affect the shear bond strength between zirconia and composite cements. However, more studies are necessary to understand the contribution of each factor.