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

Cengiz, Esra; Yilmaz, Sevcan Kurtulmuş; Karakaya, İzgen; Ongun, Salim

doi:10.1080/01694243.2018.1514992

Cited by 24 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

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%

Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

Baiomy

Younis

Khalil

2020

BDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: the study is aimed to evaluate the effect of different surface treatment methods on shear bond strength between composite repair system and both of zirconia core and veneering porcelain and analyze the mode of failure between composite repair and ceramic surface. Material and methods: 40 Ceramic discs were fabricated with diameter of 7mm and 3mm thickness and divided according to material into two groups, Zirconia core discs (n = 20) and veneering porcelain discs (n = 20). Specimens were thermocycled and then each group was subdivided according to surface treatment method into 4 equal sub groups (n = 5) ,control subgroup I air abrasion, subgroup II Cojet, subgroup III laser, subgroup IV combination of air abrasion and laser surface treatment. Composite blocks were built up and polymerized on the surface of the specimens and shear bond strength of composite to each specimen was tested using a universal testing machine and mode of failure was evaluated using stereomicroscope. Results: Regardless of ceramic type; there was a statistically significant difference between surface treatments. Cojet recorded the highest mean shear bond strength. Laser showed the highest prevalence of adhesive failure. Porcelain + Cojet showed the highest prevalence of cohesive failure. Conclusion: Cojet surface treatment provided superior shear bond strength regardless of the ceramic type whether zirconia or porcelain. Porcelain provided superior shear bond strength values in comparison to zirconia regardless of the surface treatment method tested. Porcelain showed higher percentage of cohesive failure that while the mode of failure in zirconia was most commonly adhesive.KEYWORDS Laser; Porcelain repair; Zirconia repair.

show abstract

Section: Regarding the Effect Of Ceramic Typesupporting

confidence: 66%

Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

Baiomy

Younis

Khalil

2020

BDS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…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

Effect of surface treatments on the bond strength of indirect resin composite to resin matrix ceramics

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of an indirect resin composite (IRC) to the various resin matrix ceramic (RMC) blocks using different surface treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ninety-nine cubic RMC specimens consisting of a resin nanoceramic (RNC), a polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic (PIHC), and a flexible hybrid ceramic (FHC) were divided randomly into three surface treatment subgroups (n = 11). In the experimental groups, untreated (Cnt), tribochemical silica coating (Tbc), and Neodymium-Doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet (Nd:YAG) laser irradiation (Lsr) with 3 W (150 mJ/pulse, 20 Hz for 20 sec.) were used as surface treatments. An indirect composite resin (IRC) was layered with a disc-shape mold (2 × 3 mm) onto the treated-ceramic surfaces and the specimens submitted to thermal cycling (6000 cycles, 5 – 55℃). The SBS test of specimens was performed using a universal testing machine and the specimens were examined with a scanning electron microscope to determine the failure mode. Data were statistically analyzed with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS According to the two-way ANOVA, only the surface treatment parameter was statistically significant ( P <.05) on the SBS of IRC to RMC. The SBS values of Lsr-applied RMC groups were significantly higher than Cnt groups for each RMC material, ( P <.05). Significant differences were also determined between Tbc surface treatment applied and untreated (Cnt) PIHC materials ( P =.039). CONCLUSION For promoting a reliable bond strength during characterization of RMC with IRC, Nd:YAG laser or Tbc surface treatment technique should be used, putting in consideration the microstructure and composition of RMC materials and appropriate parameters for each material.

show abstract

“…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%

Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin‐ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments

Bayraktar

Arslan

Demirtag

2020

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study intended to compare the repair bond strength of computer-aided design/ computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks consisting of resin and feldspathic ceramics following different surface treatments using the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Ten specimens were prepared with 4 mm height for Vita Enamic (VE), Lava Ultimate (LU), Vita Mark II (VM), and thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55 C). Each material was categorized into one of five subgroups according to following surface treatments: (a) bur grinding (BG), (b) hydrofluoric acid etching (HF), (c) neodymiumdoped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG or NY), (d) erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG or EY), and (e) erbium, chromium-doped yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG or ECY) laser conditioning. After surface treatment procedures, specimens were properly restored to 4 mm high with a micro-hybrid composite resin. Bar specimens (1 × 1 × 8 mm) were obtained using a low-speed cutting machine and then thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55 C). The μTBS was tested at 1 mm/min crosshead speed, and failure modes were evaluated. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. LU-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (32.94 ± 5.80 MPa) compared to LU-laser groups (p < .05). VE-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (22.06 ± 4.26 MPa) compared to other VE groups (p < .05). Among the laser groups, the NY laser produced the lowest (p < .05) μTBS for LU (13.42 ± 3.44 MPa) and VE (2.27 ± 0.85 MPa), while EY showed the highest (p < .05).Laser-treated VM groups were all prefailured. VM-HF produced a higher μTBS (18.73 ± 3.75 MPa) than VM-BG (5.05 ± 1.76 MPa) (p < .05).

show abstract

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

Cited by 24 publications

References 32 publications

Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

Effect of surface treatments on the bond strength of indirect resin composite to resin matrix ceramics

Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin‐ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About