Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Colares,Regina Claudia Ramos
Data de Publicação: 2013
Outros Autores: Neri,Jiovanne Rabelo, Souza,Andre Mattos Brito de, Pontes,Karina Matthes de Freitas, Mendonca,Juliano Sartori, Santiago,Sergio Lima
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Dental Journal
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402013000400349
Resumo: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of ceramic surface treatments and silane drying temperature on the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of a resin composite to a lithium disilicate ceramic. Twenty blocks (7x7x5 mm) of lithium disilicate-based hotpressed ceramic were fabricated and randomly divided into 4 groups: G1: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with room-temperature air; G2: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G3: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G4: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with air at room-temperature. After treatments, an adhesive system (Single Bond 2) was applied, light-cured and direct restorations were built up with a resin composite (Filtek Z250). Each specimen was stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and cut into ceramic-composite beams with 1 mm2 of cross-sectional area for µTBS testing. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (α=0.05). µTBS means (S.D.) in MPa were: G1: 32.14 (7.98), G2: 35.00 (7.77) and G3: 18.36 (6.17). All specimens of G4 failed during the cutting. G1 and G2 presented significantly higher µTBS than G3 (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between G1 and G2 (p>0.05). As far as the bond strength is concerned, surface pretreatment of lithium-disilicate ceramic with hydrofluoric acid and silane application can be used as an alternative to repair ceramic restorations with composite resin, while surface pretreatment with sandblasting should be avoided.
id FUNORP-1_c135982d8e6207bb6f047c168a916274
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0103-64402013000400349
network_acronym_str FUNORP-1
network_name_str Brazilian Dental Journal
repository_id_str
spelling Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resinsurface treatmentlithium disilicate ceramicbond strengthThe aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of ceramic surface treatments and silane drying temperature on the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of a resin composite to a lithium disilicate ceramic. Twenty blocks (7x7x5 mm) of lithium disilicate-based hotpressed ceramic were fabricated and randomly divided into 4 groups: G1: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with room-temperature air; G2: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G3: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G4: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with air at room-temperature. After treatments, an adhesive system (Single Bond 2) was applied, light-cured and direct restorations were built up with a resin composite (Filtek Z250). Each specimen was stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and cut into ceramic-composite beams with 1 mm2 of cross-sectional area for µTBS testing. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (α=0.05). µTBS means (S.D.) in MPa were: G1: 32.14 (7.98), G2: 35.00 (7.77) and G3: 18.36 (6.17). All specimens of G4 failed during the cutting. G1 and G2 presented significantly higher µTBS than G3 (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between G1 and G2 (p>0.05). As far as the bond strength is concerned, surface pretreatment of lithium-disilicate ceramic with hydrofluoric acid and silane application can be used as an alternative to repair ceramic restorations with composite resin, while surface pretreatment with sandblasting should be avoided.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2013-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402013000400349Brazilian Dental Journal v.24 n.4 2013reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/0103-6440201301960info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessColares,Regina Claudia RamosNeri,Jiovanne RabeloSouza,Andre Mattos Brito dePontes,Karina Matthes de FreitasMendonca,Juliano SartoriSantiago,Sergio Limaeng2013-10-16T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402013000400349Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2013-10-16T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
title Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
spellingShingle Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
Colares,Regina Claudia Ramos
surface treatment
lithium disilicate ceramic
bond strength
title_short Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
title_full Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
title_fullStr Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
title_full_unstemmed Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
title_sort Effect of Surface Pretreatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium-Disilicate Ceramic Repaired with Composite Resin
author Colares,Regina Claudia Ramos
author_facet Colares,Regina Claudia Ramos
Neri,Jiovanne Rabelo
Souza,Andre Mattos Brito de
Pontes,Karina Matthes de Freitas
Mendonca,Juliano Sartori
Santiago,Sergio Lima
author_role author
author2 Neri,Jiovanne Rabelo
Souza,Andre Mattos Brito de
Pontes,Karina Matthes de Freitas
Mendonca,Juliano Sartori
Santiago,Sergio Lima
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Colares,Regina Claudia Ramos
Neri,Jiovanne Rabelo
Souza,Andre Mattos Brito de
Pontes,Karina Matthes de Freitas
Mendonca,Juliano Sartori
Santiago,Sergio Lima
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv surface treatment
lithium disilicate ceramic
bond strength
topic surface treatment
lithium disilicate ceramic
bond strength
description The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of ceramic surface treatments and silane drying temperature on the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of a resin composite to a lithium disilicate ceramic. Twenty blocks (7x7x5 mm) of lithium disilicate-based hotpressed ceramic were fabricated and randomly divided into 4 groups: G1: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with room-temperature air; G2: acid etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G3: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with 45 ± 5 °C warm air; G4: airborne-particle abrasion with 50 µm aluminum oxide particles and drying silane with air at room-temperature. After treatments, an adhesive system (Single Bond 2) was applied, light-cured and direct restorations were built up with a resin composite (Filtek Z250). Each specimen was stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and cut into ceramic-composite beams with 1 mm2 of cross-sectional area for µTBS testing. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (α=0.05). µTBS means (S.D.) in MPa were: G1: 32.14 (7.98), G2: 35.00 (7.77) and G3: 18.36 (6.17). All specimens of G4 failed during the cutting. G1 and G2 presented significantly higher µTBS than G3 (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between G1 and G2 (p>0.05). As far as the bond strength is concerned, surface pretreatment of lithium-disilicate ceramic with hydrofluoric acid and silane application can be used as an alternative to repair ceramic restorations with composite resin, while surface pretreatment with sandblasting should be avoided.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402013000400349
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402013000400349
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0103-6440201301960
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal v.24 n.4 2013
reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal
instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron:FUNORP
instname_str Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron_str FUNORP
institution FUNORP
reponame_str Brazilian Dental Journal
collection Brazilian Dental Journal
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br
_version_ 1754204092677226496