Literature DB >> 18758827

Effect of surface treatment on the initial bond strength of different luting cements to zirconium oxide ceramic.

F P Nothdurft1, P J Motter, P R Pospiech.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the shear bond strength to zirconium oxide ceramic of adhesive-phosphate-monomer-containing (APM) and non-APM-containing (nAPM) luting cements after different surface treatments. nAPM cements: Bifix QM, Dual Cement, Duo Cement Plus, Multilink Automix, ParaCem Universal DC, PermaCem Smartmix, RelyX ARC, Variolink Ultra, and Variolink II; APM cements: Panavia EX, Panavia F2.0, and RelyX UniCem. Groups of ten test specimens were each prepared by layering luting cement, using cylindrical Teflon molds, onto differently treated zirconium dioxide discs. The surface treatments were airborne-particle abrasion with 110 mum alumina particles, silica coating (SC) using 30 mum alumina particles modified by silica (Rocatec System) or SC and silanization. Bifix QM and Multilink Automix were used in combination with an additional bonding/priming agent recommended by the manufacturers. After 48 h of water storage, each specimen was subjected to a shear test. Combinations involving APM-containing cements (14.41-23.88 MPa) generally exhibited higher shear bond strength than those without APM (4.29-17.34 MPa). Exceptions were Bifix QM (14.20-25.11 MPa) and Multilink Automix (19.14-23.09 MPa) in combination with system-specific silane or priming agent, which were on the upper end of shear bond strength values. With the use of the Rocatec system, a partially significant increase in shear bond strength could be achieved in nAPM cement. Modified surface treatment modalities increased the bond strength to zirconium oxide, although the most important factor in achieving a strong bond was the selection of a suitable cement. System-specific priming or bonding agents lead to further improvement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18758827     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-008-0222-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  42 in total

1.  Effect of different artificial aging conditions on ceramic-composite bond strength.

Authors:  Stefan Martin Wegner; Winnie Gerdes; Matthias Kern
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.681

2.  All-ceramic fixed partial dentures designed according to the DC-Zirkon technique. A 2-year clinical study.

Authors:  P Vult von Steyern; P Carlson; K Nilner
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.837

3.  Tensile bond of resin cements to porcelain veneers.

Authors:  J I Nicholls
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 3.426

4.  All-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Studies on aluminum oxide- and zirconium dioxide-based ceramic systems.

Authors:  Per Vult von Steyern
Journal:  Swed Dent J Suppl       Date:  2005

5.  Shear vs. tensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to ceramic.

Authors:  A Della Bona; R van Noort
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 6.116

6.  In vitro fracture resistance of posterior metal-ceramic and all-ceramic inlay-retained resin-bonded fixed partial dentures.

Authors:  Mehmet A Kiliçarslan; P Sema Kedici; H Cenker Küçükeşmen; Bülent C Uludağ
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.426

7.  A new adhesive technology for all-ceramics.

Authors:  R Janda; J-F Roulet; M Wulf; H-J Tiller
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.304

8.  Effect of ceramic surface treatment on tensile bond strength to a resin cement.

Authors:  Alvaro Della Bona; Kenneth J Anusavice; James A A Hood
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.681

9.  Sandblasting and silica coating of a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic: volume loss, morphology, and changes in the surface composition.

Authors:  M Kern; V P Thompson
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 3.426

10.  Clinical success of zirconium oxide posts with resin composite or glass-ceramic cores in endodontically treated teeth: a 4-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Stefan J Paul; Peter Werder
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.681

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Adhesion/cementation to zirconia and other non-silicate ceramics: where are we now?

Authors:  Jeffrey Y Thompson; Brian R Stoner; Jeffrey R Piascik; Robert Smith
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2010-11-20       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Marginal adaptation of three self-adhesive resin cements vs. a well-tried adhesive luting agent.

Authors:  M Behr; M Hansmann; M Rosentritt; G Handel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Fracture characteristics of anterior resin-bonded zirconia-fixed partial dentures.

Authors:  Martin Rosentritt; Stefan Ries; Carola Kolbeck; Maria Westphal; Ernst-Jürgen Richter; Gerhard Handel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-02-17       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Effects of Different Surface Treatment Methods and MDP Monomer on Resin Cementation of Zirconia Ceramics an In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Merve Çakırbay Tanış; Cihan Akçaboy
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-27

5.  The effect of alumina and aluminium nitride coating by reactive magnetron sputtering on the resin bond strength to zirconia core.

Authors:  Tolga Külünk; Safak Külünk; Seniha Baba; Ozgür Oztürk; Sengül Danişman; Soner Savaş
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2013-11-28       Impact factor: 1.904

6.  Bond strength of three luting agents to zirconia ceramic - influence of surface treatment and thermocycling.

Authors:  Ahmed Attia
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 2.698

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.