Anna-Maria Latz1, Constantin von See2, Vasilios Alevizakos3, Maximilian Sandmair1, Ahmed Othman4. 1. Center of digital dentistry and CAD/CAM technology - Danube Private University- Krems- Austria. 2. Prof. Dr. Center of digital dentistry and CAD/CAM technology - Danube Private University- Krems- Austria. 3. Dr. med. Dent. Center of digital dentistry and CAD/CAM technology - Danube Private University- Krems- Austria. 4. Dr. Center of digital dentistry and CAD/CAM technology - Danube Private University- Krems- Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare shear force of different glass-ionomer cements on 3D printed interim material in combination with and without surface pretreatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 120 rectangular specimens made of printable provisional material (Bego, Bremen, Germany) were used. After post-processing the specimens were blasted with aluminum oxide 110µm (Bego, Bremen, Germany). Extra 120 non-surface treated specimens were used as an experimental negative test group. All 240 specimens were divided randomly into 6 groups. All were cemented with a compressive load of 20 N using universal testing machine Z010 (Zwick/Roell, Ulm, Germany) to ensure a comparable cementing process. Each of the six groups were cemented with different cements (CX Plus (Shofu, Ratingen, Germany), Vivaglass CEM PL (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein), Aqua Cem (Dentsply Sirona, Bensheim, Germany), Ketac Cem (3M, Neuss, Germany), Meron Plus AC (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany), and Fuji 1 (GC, Tokyo, Japan). Shear force test was performed, and forces were statistically analyzed via Anova test (significance level p<0.001). RESULTS: All the pre-treated specimens showed a significantly higher bonding strength compared to not pretreated. Meron Plus AC showed the highest shear overall force. The Anova test showed a significant difference between all pretreated study groups (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An increase of the necessary forces for all groups was shown in pretreated group. Within the limitations of this study, a surface pretreatment is recommended when bonding a 3D interim material with glass ionomer cements. Key words:Shear force, 3D printing, glass ionomer cement, mechanical evaluation, CAD/CAM. . Copyright:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare shear force of different glass-ionomer cements on 3D printed interim material in combination with and without surface pretreatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 120 rectangular specimens made of printable provisional material (Bego, Bremen, Germany) were used. After post-processing the specimens were blasted with aluminum oxide 110µm (Bego, Bremen, Germany). Extra 120 non-surface treated specimens were used as an experimental negative test group. All 240 specimens were divided randomly into 6 groups. All were cemented with a compressive load of 20 N using universal testing machine Z010 (Zwick/Roell, Ulm, Germany) to ensure a comparable cementing process. Each of the six groups were cemented with different cements (CX Plus (Shofu, Ratingen, Germany), Vivaglass CEM PL (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein), Aqua Cem (Dentsply Sirona, Bensheim, Germany), Ketac Cem (3M, Neuss, Germany), Meron Plus AC (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany), and Fuji 1 (GC, Tokyo, Japan). Shear force test was performed, and forces were statistically analyzed via Anova test (significance level p<0.001). RESULTS: All the pre-treated specimens showed a significantly higher bonding strength compared to not pretreated. Meron Plus AC showed the highest shear overall force. The Anova test showed a significant difference between all pretreated study groups (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An increase of the necessary forces for all groups was shown in pretreated group. Within the limitations of this study, a surface pretreatment is recommended when bonding a 3D interim material with glass ionomer cements. Key words:Shear force, 3D printing, glass ionomer cement, mechanical evaluation, CAD/CAM. . Copyright:
Authors: Theodoros Kapos; Linah M Ashy; German O Gallucci; Hans-Peter Weber; Daniel Wismeijer Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.804