Literature DB >> 20074788

Variables related to materials and preparing for bond strength testing irrespective of the test protocol.

Lawrence Mair1, P Padipatvuthikul.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Resin bonding can be compared to making a sandwich with the tooth on one side and the restoration on the other, a layer of bonding resin is applied to either side and a filled resin (composite) placed in between. This presentation considers factors that influence the restoration side of the sandwich and various ways that the assembled testpieces may be "aged" prior to testing. The materials to be bonded may be either ceramic, metal or composite formed by methods such as casting, pressing, sintering or machining. The fabrication method determines the susceptibility of the bonding surface to physical or chemical modification. The treatment of the surface prior to bonding can be physical (e.g. sandblasting) or chemical (e.g. metal primer); but is more likely to be a combination (e.g. silica deposition+silane). PREPARATION OF THE BONDING SURFACE: Successful bonding depends on establishing a surface with a high population of unreacted vinyl groups (-CC) that can then be cross-polymerized to the resin in the bonding composite. The physical approach has involved etching or sandblasting the surfaces; but the ability to form a microretentive surface in this way depends on a heterogeneous surface. Noble metals and modern high strength ceramics have a more homogeneous surface and are not easily etched. To overcome this problem a number of ways to deposit a silica layer on the bonding surface have been developed: the Silicoater that involves baking on a silica layer, the Rocatec technique (CoJet) that involves air blasting silica onto the surface in conjunction with an abrasive; and two more modern approaches: sol-gel evaporation and molecular vapor deposition (MVD). All these techniques require the subsequent application of a silane layer to provide the -CC moieties. The use of primers without an intervening silica layer has been tested and found to be successful with some specialized bonding systems that contain agents such as methacryloyloxydecyldihydrogen-phosphate (MDP) (PanaviaEX). AGING OF TESTPIECES PRIOR TO BONDING: The most common type of aging is storage in water at temperatures from ambient to 100 degrees Celsius. This generally decreases bond strengths; but not to catastrophic values. A more exacting pre-test regime is thermal cycling. In some studies this caused a slightly greater reduction in bond strength than storage in water; but in other tests it resulted in total failure. As some testpieces have spontaneously debonded during thermal cycling, it seems sensible to include TC in any screening test of new materials. Mechanical cycling (fatigue) prior to testing has a very significant effect and the bond strength that can withstand 1,000,000 cycles can be one sixth of the bond strength in a simple monotonic test (tensile, shear or compression). Whereas simple monotonic tests provide a blunt instrument for eliminating poorly performing techniques their use for discriminating between established techniques is open to discussion. Copyright 2009 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20074788     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  12 in total

1.  Adhesive strength of self-adhesive resins to lithium disilicate ceramic and dentin: effect of dentin chelating agents.

Authors:  Samah Saker; Ahmad Alnazzawi; Mutlu Özcan
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2014-11-26       Impact factor: 2.634

2.  Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets to Composite Restorations Using Universal Adhesive.

Authors:  Soodeh Tahmasbi; Mohammadreza Badiee; Maryam Modarresi
Journal:  J Dent (Shiraz)       Date:  2019-06

3.  Nanosilica coating for bonding improvements to zirconia.

Authors:  Chen Chen; Gang Chen; Haifeng Xie; Wenyong Dai; Feimin Zhang
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2013-10-25

4.  Effect of root canal preparation, type of endodontic post and mechanical cycling on root fracture strength.

Authors:  Marília Pivetta Rippe; Manuela Favarin Santini; Carlos Alexandre Souza Bier; Paolo Baldissara; Luiz Felipe Valandro
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.698

Review 5.  Validity of bond strength tests: A critical review: Part I.

Authors:  Kantheti Sirisha; Tankonda Rambabu; Yalavarthi Ravi Shankar; Pabbati Ravikumar
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2014-07

6.  Can long-term dentine bonding created in real life be forecasted by parameters established in the laboratory?

Authors:  Heleine M C Rêgo; Thaís S Alves; Eduardo Bresciani; Li-Na Niu; Franklin R Tay; César R Pucci
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-11-25       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Effect of cariogenic challenge on the stability of dentin bonds.

Authors:  Fernanda Blos Borges; Ellen Luísa Kochhann DE Lima; Fernanda Wiengärtner Machado; Noéli Boscato; Françoise Hélène Van De Sande; Rafael Ratto de Moraes; Maximiliano Sérgio Cenci
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

Review 8.  Assessment of Bonding Effectiveness of Adhesive Materials to Tooth Structure using Bond Strength Test Methods: A Review of Literature.

Authors:  Aminah M El Mourad
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2018-09-28

9.  Debonding force and shear bond strength of an array of CAD/CAM-based customized orthodontic brackets, placed by indirect bonding- An In Vitro study.

Authors:  Ha-Na Sha; Sung-Hwan Choi; Hyung-Seog Yu; Chung-Ju Hwang; Jung-Yul Cha; Kwang-Mahn Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Compatibility of a Silicone Impression/Adhesive System to FDM-Printed Tray Materials-A Laboratory Peel-off Study.

Authors:  Yichen Xu; Alexey Unkovskiy; Felix Klaue; Frank Rupp; Juergen Geis-Gerstorfer; Sebastian Spintzyk
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2018-10-07       Impact factor: 3.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.