2018
DOI: 10.1080/01694243.2018.1514992
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Different Surface Treatment Methods on Micro-Shear Bond Strength of CAD-CAM Restorative Materials to Resin Cement.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
33
0
3

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
33
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Laser showed the statistically significantly lowest mean shear bond strength, which is in accordance with Saraç et al [15]. This can be explained as the porcelain has high content of silica 50-60% by weight and the action of Cojet increased the amount of silica by embedding silica coated aluminum oxide to the surface of the porcelain which resulted in high amount of chemically bondable silica that achieved high bond strength to the silane coupling agent and also can be attributed to the increase in surface area and roughness that resulted from the blasting action of silica coated aluminum oxide to the surface of porcelain which was considered by Saraç et al the "major" factor for a strong bond [17,19] In general the laser shear bond strength values were less in the porcelain sub groups than in zirconia sub groups and this can be explained in accordance to Sari et al [22] in his study that measured light transmission of Er:Yag laser through different ceramic materials and it was found that the light transmission of laser in monolithic zirconia is higher than in porcelain which means the energy of the laser is not absorbed in zirconia with the same degree in feldpsathic porcelain and as a result it will not affect the surface or change its topography as well as the feldpsathic porcelain surface [22][23][24][25][26][27][28].…”
Section: Regarding the Effect Of Ceramic Typesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…Laser showed the statistically significantly lowest mean shear bond strength, which is in accordance with Saraç et al [15]. This can be explained as the porcelain has high content of silica 50-60% by weight and the action of Cojet increased the amount of silica by embedding silica coated aluminum oxide to the surface of the porcelain which resulted in high amount of chemically bondable silica that achieved high bond strength to the silane coupling agent and also can be attributed to the increase in surface area and roughness that resulted from the blasting action of silica coated aluminum oxide to the surface of porcelain which was considered by Saraç et al the "major" factor for a strong bond [17,19] In general the laser shear bond strength values were less in the porcelain sub groups than in zirconia sub groups and this can be explained in accordance to Sari et al [22] in his study that measured light transmission of Er:Yag laser through different ceramic materials and it was found that the light transmission of laser in monolithic zirconia is higher than in porcelain which means the energy of the laser is not absorbed in zirconia with the same degree in feldpsathic porcelain and as a result it will not affect the surface or change its topography as well as the feldpsathic porcelain surface [22][23][24][25][26][27][28].…”
Section: Regarding the Effect Of Ceramic Typesupporting
confidence: 66%
“…The use of lower power of Nd:YAG laser with constant water cooling may reduce thermal side effects on PIHC materials 36. Cengiz-Yanardag et al42 compared the effect of 2 W and 3 W Er,Cr: YSGG laser surface treatment (a repetition rate of 10 Hz, and 140 µs pulse duration with 55% water and 65% air for 20 sec.) on RMCs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the same study, for RNCs 3W Er,Cr:YSGG laser group showed lower bond strength values compared to control and 2W laser groups. According to Cengiz-Yanardag et al,42 the low bond strengths resulting from laser surface treatment may be due to thermal surface damage caused by laser power settings. In contrast; RNCs and FHCs evaluated in our study, 3W Nd:YAG laser applied groups showed higher bond strength values compared to Cnt groups.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The findings of our study support the findings of Shiu et al In contrast to our study in which 150 mJ pulse energy was used, using EY at 300 mJ pulse energy demonstrated a 42.8 MPa shear bond strength value for leucite‐based ceramics in the study of Gökçe et al (2007). Besides this, using ECY laser at 3 W and 10 Hz settings was recommended for surface treatment of a lithium disilicate glass ceramic before adhesive cementation in a previous study (Cengiz‐Yanardag, Yilmaz, Karakaya, & Ongun, 2019). In another study, Erdemir et al (2014) revealed that the EY laser resulted in a smooth surface on lithium disilicate glass ceramic as seen on SEM images.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%