IADR Abstract Archives
Bonding properties of acrylic resin to zirconia and polyaryletherketone (PAEK)
Abstract: Objectives: With the rapid pace of technological development, CAD/CAM technology, low-wax techniques, and digital workflow have become mainstream in laboratory and clinical dentistry. Furthermore, the popularization of aesthetic concepts has raised doubts regarding the use of traditional alloy materials (Co-Cr) in removable partial dentures (RPD). This study aims to discuss the bonding strength of aesthetic dental materials to acrylic resin and to assess the feasibility of using these aesthetic dental materials in RPD applications.
Methods: Five types of testing materials were considered (control: Co-Cr; two zirconia-based materials: yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP), and ceria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia/alumina nanocomposite (Ce-TZP/A); two polyaryletherketone (PAEK) materials: polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK)). All sample surfaces were prepared via grinding, sandblasting, and priming according to the manufacturer's instructions prior to the acrylic resin polymerization. The surface roughness was measured using atomic force microscopy, and the shear bond strength (SBS) was determined. The obtained data were analyzed using Tukey's HSD (α=0.05). After the SBS test, the interfacial failure modes were observed using a thermal field emission scanning electron microscope.
Results: The PAEK materials showed lower surface roughness than zirconia and Co-Cr alloy (P<0.05) after surface pretreatment. Within the material group (zirconia or PAEK), there was no significant difference (P>0.05). Zirconia (Y-TZP=12.47±4.8 MPa; Ce-TZP/A=11.80±4.6 MPa) and Co-Cr alloy (11.73±1.82 MPa) had a comparable SBS, while the PAEK materials (PEEK=7.60±2.0 MPa; PEKK=8.38±1.9 MPa) had a relatively lower SBS. Adhesive failure was the dominant failure mode in all the test groups.
Conclusions: The SBS values of the zirconia and PAEK materials with acrylic resins were consistent with the clinical guidelines of ISO 10477 (>5.0 MPa). Within this feasibility study, these aesthetic dental materials were evaluated as potential alternative materials for RPD frameworks.
Methods: Five types of testing materials were considered (control: Co-Cr; two zirconia-based materials: yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP), and ceria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia/alumina nanocomposite (Ce-TZP/A); two polyaryletherketone (PAEK) materials: polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK)). All sample surfaces were prepared via grinding, sandblasting, and priming according to the manufacturer's instructions prior to the acrylic resin polymerization. The surface roughness was measured using atomic force microscopy, and the shear bond strength (SBS) was determined. The obtained data were analyzed using Tukey's HSD (α=0.05). After the SBS test, the interfacial failure modes were observed using a thermal field emission scanning electron microscope.
Results: The PAEK materials showed lower surface roughness than zirconia and Co-Cr alloy (P<0.05) after surface pretreatment. Within the material group (zirconia or PAEK), there was no significant difference (P>0.05). Zirconia (Y-TZP=12.47±4.8 MPa; Ce-TZP/A=11.80±4.6 MPa) and Co-Cr alloy (11.73±1.82 MPa) had a comparable SBS, while the PAEK materials (PEEK=7.60±2.0 MPa; PEKK=8.38±1.9 MPa) had a relatively lower SBS. Adhesive failure was the dominant failure mode in all the test groups.
Conclusions: The SBS values of the zirconia and PAEK materials with acrylic resins were consistent with the clinical guidelines of ISO 10477 (>5.0 MPa). Within this feasibility study, these aesthetic dental materials were evaluated as potential alternative materials for RPD frameworks.