Effect of surface treatment of CAD/CAM resin composites on the shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement

Nagasawa, Y.; Hibino, Y.; Eda, Yoshikazu; Nakajima, Hiroshi

doi:10.4012/dmj.2019-431

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a consequence, SB leads to an improvement in bond strengths due to the increment on surface roughness and combined use of sandblasting and silanization have no synergistic effect [ 7 ]. On the other hand, Nagasawa et al found higher bond strengths for most analyzed CAD/CAM RBCs to a self-adhesive RCs when SB was combined with silanization, which is contrary to the present results [ 29 ].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Adhesion to a CAD/CAM Composite: Causal Factors for a Reliable Long-Term Bond

Duma

Ilie

2022

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer aided design/manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology has become an increasingly popular part of dentistry, which today also includes CAD/CAM resin-based composite (RBC) applications. Because CAD/CAM RBCs are much more difficult to bond, many methods and attachment materials are still being proposed, while the best application method is still a matter of debate. The present study therefore evaluates causal factors for a reliable long-term bond, which includes the surface preparation of the CAD/CAM RBC, aging and the type of luting material. The reliability of the bond was calculated, and supplemented by fractography to identify fracture mechanisms. Five categories of luting materials were used: (1) temporary zinc phosphate cement, (2) glass ionomer cement (GIC), (3) resin-modified GIC, (4) conventional adhesive resin cement (ARC), and (5) self-adhesive RC. Half of the CAD/CAM RBC surfaces (n = 200) were sandblasted (SB) with 50 µm aluminum oxide, while the other half remained untreated. Bond strength measurements of the 400 resulting specimens were carried out after 24 h (n = 200) or after additional aging (10,000 thermo-cycles between 5 and 55 °C) (n = 200). The data were statistically analyzed using one- and three-way ANOVA followed by Games-Howell post-hoc test (α = 0.05) and Weibull analysis. Aging resulted in a significant decrease in bond strength primarily for the conventional cements. The highest bond strengths and reliabilities were recorded for both ARCs. SB caused a significant increase in bond strength for most luting materials, but also caused microcracks in the CAD/CAM RBC. These microcracks might compromise the long-term reliability of the bond in vivo.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Adhesion to a CAD/CAM Composite: Causal Factors for a Reliable Long-Term Bond

Duma

Ilie

2022

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The P block contained a high content of filler particle (approximately 82 wt%) in comparison with approximately 62 wt% in A block, which is a relatively low content [9,16]. Some self-adhesive resin cements were used for the cementation of CRB [23,24]. The intaglio surface of the CRB restoration is commonly treated with a silane coupling agent before cementation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Immediate and Delayed Cementations for CAD/CAM Resin Block after Alumina Air Abrasion on Adhesion to Newly Developed Resin Cement

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of one week of Computer-aided design/Computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) crown storage on the μTBS between resin cement and CAD/CAM resin composite blocks. The micro-tensile bond strength (μTBS) test groups were divided into 4 conditions. There are two types of CAD/CAM resin composite blocks, namely A block and P block (KATANA Avencia Block and KATANA Avencia P Block, Kuraray Noritake Dental, Tokyo, Japan) and two types of resin cements. Additionally, there are two curing methods (light cure and chemical cure) prior to the μTBS test—Immediate: cementation was performed immediately; Delay: cementation was conducted after one week of storage in air under laboratory conditions. The effect of Immediate and Delayed cementations were evaluated by a μTBS test, surface roughness measurements, light intensity measurements, water sorption measurements and Scanning electron microscope/Energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (SEM/EDS) analysis. From the results of the μTBS test, we found that Delayed cementation showed significantly lower bond strength than that of Immediate cementation for both resin cements and both curing methods using A block. There was no significant difference between the two types of resin cements or two curing methods. Furthermore, water sorption of A block was significantly higher than that of P block. Within the limitations of this study, alumina air abrasion of CAD/CAM resin composite restorations should be performed immediately before bonding at the chairside to minimize the effect of humidity on bonding.

show abstract

“…Seventy-seven articles were removed by reading the titles and abstracts, and 42 were removed after complete reading. The remaining 29 articles [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]14,22,[25][26][27][28]31,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] were selected for the quality analysis. Manual research also retrieved three studies [30,45,46], three randomized clinical trials [24,47,48], six reviews [15,23,29,[49][50][51], and three meta-analyses [11,12,20], which were used to broaden the introduction and discussion sessions.…”

Section: General Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) are used because of their mechanical properties, ease of cementation protocols, and lack of requirements for acid conditioning or adhesive systems. SARCs are generally dual-cured, photoactivated, and self-cured, with a slight increase in acidic pH, allowing self-adhesiveness and increasing resistance to hydrolysis. This systematic review assessed the adhesive strength of SARC systems luted to different substrates and computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic blocks. The PubMed/MedLine and Science Direct databases were searched using the Boolean formula [((dental or tooth) AND (self-adhesive) AND (luting or cement) AND CAD-CAM) NOT (endodontics or implants)]. Of the 199 articles obtained, 31 were selected for the quality assessment. Lava Ultimate (resin matrix filled with nanoceramic) and Vita Enamic (polymer-infiltrated ceramic) blocks were the most tested. Rely X Unicem 2 was the most tested resin cement, followed by Rely X Unicem > Ultimate > U200, and μTBS was the test most used. The meta-analysis confirmed the substrate-dependent adhesive strength of SARCs, with significant differences between them and between SARCs and conventional resin-based adhesive cement (α < 0.05). SARCs are promising. However, one must be aware of the differences in the adhesive strengths. An appropriate combination of materials must be considered to improve the durability and stability of restorations.

show abstract

Effect of surface treatment of CAD/CAM resin composites on the shear bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement

Cited by 10 publications

References 37 publications

Adhesion to a CAD/CAM Composite: Causal Factors for a Reliable Long-Term Bond

Adhesion to a CAD/CAM Composite: Causal Factors for a Reliable Long-Term Bond

Effects of Immediate and Delayed Cementations for CAD/CAM Resin Block after Alumina Air Abrasion on Adhesion to Newly Developed Resin Cement

Effectiveness of Self-Adhesive Resin Luting Cement in CAD-CAM Blocks—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About