STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The bond strength between framework metals and composites, used as alternatives to porcelain, requires further study because adhesive failures can promote microleakage, discoloration, and stains in composites. PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study was to analyze and compare the tensile strength between the base metal Ni-Cr alloys: (Wirocer and Wiron 99) and 2 composites (Artglass and Solidex) with 2 types of mechanical retention (0.4-mm and 0.6-mm beads); 2 types of chemical treatment (Siloc system and Metal Photo Primer system) and the combination of both treatments on a metal framework; to verify whether these composite systems were strong enough to be used as alternatives to porcelain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 144 specimens, cylindrical metal rods (3 mm diameter x 60 mm length), were cast in Ni-Cr alloy (Wiron 99 or Wirocer), divided into 6 equal groups corresponding to 6 types of retention: airborne particle abrasion/control (A), chemical (C), mechanical with 0.4-mm (M4) and 0.6-mm beads (M6), and chemical/mechanical with 0.4-mm (CM4) and 0.6-mm beads (CM6). Composite rings formed around the rods (6.0 mm diameter X 2.0 mm thickness) of Artglass or Solidex were light polymerized in the UniXS unit (wavelength range of 320-520 nm for 540s) according to the manufacturer's specifications. Specimens were invested, and their tensile strength was measured at fracture with an EMIC-MEM 2000 universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2.0 mm/min and 500 kgf load cell. Statistical analysis was carried out with analysis of variance and Tukey's test at significance level P=.01. RESULTS: The highest mean retention values were recorded for groups CM6 (63.57 MPa) and M6 (63.05 MPa). The lowest mean retention values were recorded for groups A (30.63 MPa) and C (25.07 MPa). No significant difference was found regarding the alloys used in this study (P<.01). There was a significant difference in shear strength (P<.01) between Solidex (52.33 MPa) and Artglass (43.18 MPa). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, mechanical retention with 0.6-mm beads and chemical/mechanical retention with 0.6-mm beads increased the metal-composite tensile bond strength. No significant difference was found between these 2 retention systems. Chemical and airborne particle abrasion/control retentions were statistically weaker than the other types of retention tested. The retention means corresponding to the commercial-grade Ni-Cr alloys used were statistically different. The composite Solidex showed a tensile strength mean statistically higher than Artglass. All values observed were higher than that recommended for metal-ceramic dental restorative systems (25 MPa-ISO 9693).
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The bond strength between framework metals and composites, used as alternatives to porcelain, requires further study because adhesive failures can promote microleakage, discoloration, and stains in composites. PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study was to analyze and compare the tensile strength between the base metal Ni-Cr alloys: (Wirocer and Wiron 99) and 2 composites (Artglass and Solidex) with 2 types of mechanical retention (0.4-mm and 0.6-mm beads); 2 types of chemical treatment (Siloc system and Metal Photo Primer system) and the combination of both treatments on a metal framework; to verify whether these composite systems were strong enough to be used as alternatives to porcelain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 144 specimens, cylindrical metal rods (3 mm diameter x 60 mm length), were cast in Ni-Cr alloy (Wiron 99 or Wirocer), divided into 6 equal groups corresponding to 6 types of retention: airborne particle abrasion/control (A), chemical (C), mechanical with 0.4-mm (M4) and 0.6-mm beads (M6), and chemical/mechanical with 0.4-mm (CM4) and 0.6-mm beads (CM6). Composite rings formed around the rods (6.0 mm diameter X 2.0 mm thickness) of Artglass or Solidex were light polymerized in the UniXS unit (wavelength range of 320-520 nm for 540s) according to the manufacturer's specifications. Specimens were invested, and their tensile strength was measured at fracture with an EMIC-MEM 2000 universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 2.0 mm/min and 500 kgf load cell. Statistical analysis was carried out with analysis of variance and Tukey's test at significance level P=.01. RESULTS: The highest mean retention values were recorded for groups CM6 (63.57 MPa) and M6 (63.05 MPa). The lowest mean retention values were recorded for groups A (30.63 MPa) and C (25.07 MPa). No significant difference was found regarding the alloys used in this study (P<.01). There was a significant difference in shear strength (P<.01) between Solidex (52.33 MPa) and Artglass (43.18 MPa). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, mechanical retention with 0.6-mm beads and chemical/mechanical retention with 0.6-mm beads increased the metal-composite tensile bond strength. No significant difference was found between these 2 retention systems. Chemical and airborne particle abrasion/control retentions were statistically weaker than the other types of retention tested. The retention means corresponding to the commercial-grade Ni-Cr alloys used were statistically different. The composite Solidex showed a tensile strength mean statistically higher than Artglass. All values observed were higher than that recommended for metal-ceramic dental restorative systems (25 MPa-ISO 9693).