Neslihan Tekçe1, Safa Tuncer2, Mustafa Demirci2, Dilan Kara1, Canan Baydemir3. 1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli, Turkey. 2. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of sandblasting powder particles on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of dual-cure adhesive cement to CAD/CAM blocks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CAD/CAM blocks (Cerasmart, VITA, and LAVA) were cut in slabs and divided into groups: group 1, no sandblasting; group 2, sandblasted with 27-μm Al2 O3 ; group 3, sandblasted with 30-μm CoJet; group 4, sandblasted with 50-μm Al2 O3 . After sandblasting, all specimens were silanized and luted using dual-cure adhesive cement (G-CEM LinkForce). After 24 hours, bonded specimens were cut into 1 ± 0.2 mm2 sticks, and μTBS values were obtained (N = 30). Additionally, 132 CAD/CAM block sections were prepared for surface roughness testing and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluations. Results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis One-way ANOVA and Dunn's Post Hoc Test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Group 1 exhibited significantly lower μTBS than the other groups (p < 0.05). The highest bond strength values were obtained from group 4 (p > 0.05). For LAVA, μTBS values of specimens that were sandblasted with 50-μm Al2 O3 powder were significantly higher than 30-μm-SiO2 and 27-μm Al2 O3 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The sand particles investigated (27-μm Al2 O3 , 30-μm SiO2 , or 50-μm Al2 O3 ) did not significantly affect μTBS results of CAD/CAM blocks for Cerasmart and VITA, although the results changed significantly for LAVA. The ideal bond protocol for CAD/CAM blocks is specific to the material used.
PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of sandblasting powder particles on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of dual-cure adhesive cement to CAD/CAM blocks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CAD/CAM blocks (Cerasmart, VITA, and LAVA) were cut in slabs and divided into groups: group 1, no sandblasting; group 2, sandblasted with 27-μm Al2 O3 ; group 3, sandblasted with 30-μm CoJet; group 4, sandblasted with 50-μm Al2 O3 . After sandblasting, all specimens were silanized and luted using dual-cure adhesive cement (G-CEM LinkForce). After 24 hours, bonded specimens were cut into 1 ± 0.2 mm2 sticks, and μTBS values were obtained (N = 30). Additionally, 132 CAD/CAM block sections were prepared for surface roughness testing and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) evaluations. Results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis One-way ANOVA and Dunn's Post Hoc Test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Group 1 exhibited significantly lower μTBS than the other groups (p < 0.05). The highest bond strength values were obtained from group 4 (p > 0.05). For LAVA, μTBS values of specimens that were sandblasted with 50-μm Al2 O3 powder were significantly higher than 30-μm-SiO2 and 27-μm Al2 O3 (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The sand particles investigated (27-μm Al2 O3 , 30-μm SiO2 , or 50-μm Al2 O3 ) did not significantly affect μTBS results of CAD/CAM blocks for Cerasmart and VITA, although the results changed significantly for LAVA. The ideal bond protocol for CAD/CAM blocks is specific to the material used.