Comparison of the effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of different cements with nickel chromium metal alloy: An in vitro study

Abstract

BackgroundFor success of any indirect metal restoration, a strong bond between cement and the intaglio surface of metal is imperative. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the effect of different surface treatment on the tensile and shear bond strength of different cements with nickel–chromium alloy.Material and Methods120 premolars were sectioned horizontally parallel to the occlusal surface to expose the dentin. Wax patterns were fabricated for individual tooth followed by casting them in nickel chromium alloy. 60 samples were tested for tensile bond strength, and the remaining 60 for shear bond strength. The samples were divided into three groups (of 20 samples each) as per the following surface treatment: oxidation only, oxidation and sandblasting, or oxidation, sandblasting followed by application of alloy primer. Each group was subdivided into 2 subgroups of 10 samples each, according to the bonding cement i.e RM-GIC and resin cement. Samples were subjected to thermocycling procedure followed by evaluation of bond strength.ResultsTwo-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) was performed to compare the means of tensile and shear bond strength across type of surface treatment and cement, followed by post hoc parametric analysis. For all tests ‘p’ value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ConclusionsThe surface treatment of oxidation and sandblasting followed by application of alloy primer offered the maximum tensile and shear bond strength for both RM GIC and resin cement. Resin cement exhibited greater tensile and shear bond strength than RM-GIC for all the three surface treatment methods. Key words:Resin cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement, oxidation, sandblasting, alloy primer, tensile bond strength, shear bond strength, universal testing machine.

Effect of a filled adhesive as the desensitizer on bond strength of “Self‐Adhesive Cements To” differently severity of fluorosed dentin

“…However, P&B NT pretreatment had no statistical significance, maybe the physical property is more important in the bonding mechanism for RelyX Luting. Kapoor et al () and Piwowarczyk, Lauer and Sorensen () has reported that RMGIC provided lower bond strength values than self‐adhesive resin cement, which was also found in this study. Berzins, Abey, Costache, Wilkie, and Roberts () demonstrated that during early RMGIC development, acid‐base and light‐polymerization reactions competed with and inhibited one another, which might explain the low retentive strength of RMGIC.…”

“…However, P&B NT pretreatment had no statistical significance, maybe the physical property is more important in the bonding mechanism for RelyX Luting. Kapoor et al (2017) and Piwowarczyk, Lauer and Sorensen (2004) has reported that RMGIC provided lower bond strength values than self-adhesive resin cement, which was also found in this study. Berzins, Abey, Costache, Wilkie, and Roberts (2010) Thermocycling has been widely used to simulate thermal stresses commonly occurring in the oral environment and has been performed to compare bond strength according to aging (Lee, Kang, Oh, Seo, & Park, 2015).…”

“…Conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) was susceptible to hydrolytic degradation (Yilmaz, Simsek, Dalmis, Gurbuz, & Kocogullari, 2006). Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), which is also considered as a self-adhesive material/cement, has been developed by adding resin components to GIC to overcome the problem of moisture sensitivity, and offers the benefit of both resins and GIC like fluoride release and greater strength (Kapoor, Prabhu, & Balakrishnan, 2017;Pathak, Shashibhushan, Poornima, & Reddy, 2016;Rosenstiel, Land, & Crispin, 1998). In RMGIC, the resin component was thought to act as a reinforcing agent, resulting in the combination of micromechanical interlocking and chemical adhesion (Sekhar, Anil, Thomas, & Ginjupalli, 2017;Somani, Jaidka, Singh, & Sibal, 2016).…”

Thickness and yttria percentage influences the fracture resistance of laminate veneer zirconia restorations

“… Conditioning of zirconia‐based laminate veneers: through sandblasting for 10 s at 0.2 MPa pressure using 50 μm diameter Al 2 O 3 particles, then ultrasonic cleaning for 5 min and dried, then primer left for 60 s and air dried for 5 s (Monobond plus primer Ivoclar Vivadent) (Gresnigt et al, 2021 ; Saker & Özcan, 2021 ). Conditioning of the corresponding metal dies surfaces: done by oxidation, sandblasting for 20 s at 0.3 MPa pressure using 150 μm diameter Al 2 O 3 particles, ultrasonic clean for 5 min, air dried and finally primer applicated for 60 s and air dried for 5 s (Kapoor et al, 2017 ). …”

“…Conditioning of the corresponding metal dies surfaces: done by oxidation, sandblasting for 20 s at 0.3 MPa pressure using 150 μm diameter Al 2 O 3 particles, ultrasonic clean for 5 min, air dried and finally primer applicated for 60 s and air dried for 5 s (Kapoor et al, 2017 ).…”