S G Kourtis1. 1. Department of Fixed Prosthodontics, University of Athens, Greece.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Resinous materials for the veneers of fixed prostheses commonly require mechanical retention on metal substructures because there is no chemical adhesion. However, mechanical retention does not restrict creation of a marginal gap at the resin-metal interface, which can cause discoloration or detachment of resinous material. The development of a chemical resin-to-metal bonding could resolve this problem and also reduce the need for mechanical retention (pearls, wires) on metal frameworks. PURPOSE: This study evaluated six current methods with the use of various storage conditions to predict clinical efficacy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six resin-to-metal bonding systems were tested: Silicoater, Silicoater MD, Rocatec, OVS, Sebond, and Spectra-Link. All specimens were examined in bending tests after 24 hours of dry storage (category A), after 24 hours of water storage and thermocycling (category B), and after 2 months of water storage and thermocycling (category C). Tensional tests were completed for all bonding systems after dry storage, and microscopic examination (optical and SEM) was performed for all specimens. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that certain systems can provide stable bonding of resin to metal substructures despite prolonged wet storage and intensive thermocycling. These systems can also be used clinically without retentive configurations on metal frameworks, resulting in better esthetics. Some bonding systems revealed progressive weakening of bond strengths, so research is needed to verify their clinical efficacy.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Resinous materials for the veneers of fixed prostheses commonly require mechanical retention on metal substructures because there is no chemical adhesion. However, mechanical retention does not restrict creation of a marginal gap at the resin-metal interface, which can cause discoloration or detachment of resinous material. The development of a chemical resin-to-metal bonding could resolve this problem and also reduce the need for mechanical retention (pearls, wires) on metal frameworks. PURPOSE: This study evaluated six current methods with the use of various storage conditions to predict clinical efficacy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six resin-to-metal bonding systems were tested: Silicoater, Silicoater MD, Rocatec, OVS, Sebond, and Spectra-Link. All specimens were examined in bending tests after 24 hours of dry storage (category A), after 24 hours of water storage and thermocycling (category B), and after 2 months of water storage and thermocycling (category C). Tensional tests were completed for all bonding systems after dry storage, and microscopic examination (optical and SEM) was performed for all specimens. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that certain systems can provide stable bonding of resin to metal substructures despite prolonged wet storage and intensive thermocycling. These systems can also be used clinically without retentive configurations on metal frameworks, resulting in better esthetics. Some bonding systems revealed progressive weakening of bond strengths, so research is needed to verify their clinical efficacy.