Effect of zirconia decontamination protocols on bond strength and surface wettability

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects of human saliva decontamination protocols on bond strength of resin cement to zirconia (Y‐PSZ), wettability, and microbial decontamination.Materials and methodsZirconia plates were sandblasted and divided into (a) not contaminated, (b) contaminated with human saliva and: (c) not cleaned, (d) cleaned with air‐water spray, (e) cleaned with 70% ethanol, (f) cleaned with Ivoclean, or (g) cleaned with nonthermal atmospheric plasma (NTAP). The wettability and microbial decontamination of the surfaces were determined after saliva contamination or cleaning. Monobond Plus (Ivoclar Vivadent) was applied after cleaning, followed by Variolink LC (Ivoclar Vivadent). The samples were stored 1 week before shear bond strength (SBS) testing, and data (SBS and wettability) were analyzed by one‐way analysis of variance and Tukey test (α = .05).ResultsSaliva contamination reduced SBS to zirconia compared to not contaminated. Both Ivoclean and NTAP produced higher SBS compared to not cleaned and were not significantly different from the not contaminated. Ivoclean produced the highest contact angle, and NTAP the lowest. With the exception of using just water‐spray, all cleaning protocols decontaminated the specimens.ConclusionsBoth Ivoclean and NTAP overcame the effects of saliva contamination, producing an SBS to zirconia comparable to the positive control.Clinical significanceDental ceramics should be cleaned prior to resin cementation to eliminate the effects of human saliva contamination, and Ivoclean and NTAP are considered suitable materials for this purpose.

Effect of Cleaning Protocol on Bond Strength between Resin Composite Cement and Three Different CAD/CAM Materials

“…With respect to the different tested restorative materials, the cleaning protocol neither affected the bond strength nor the fracture types between the respective material and resin composite cement. This outcome partly coincides with the results found in previous investigations, in which the impact of the cleaning protocol is controversially discussed [ 9 , 23 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 32 , 33 ]. In compliance, most investigations summarized that the contamination with saliva negatively affects the bond strength between a restorative material and resin composite cement [ 9 , 27 , 29 ].…”

“…Within the present investigation, the substrates were not contaminated with saliva or blood to solely test the impact of the cleaning protocol. At first, this might be noticed as limitation of the present investigation, since the contamination with saliva and/or blood often happens during the try in of the restoration in the clinical practice and therefore is considered in several previous investigations when testing the impact of different cleaning protocols on the bond strength between dental materials and resin composite cement [ 29 , 30 ]. However, in comparison to previous studies, the aim of the present investigation was not to evaluate the efficacy of the tested cleaning protocols after any kind of contamination but to analyze the impact of the cleaning protocol on the bond strength between resin composite cement and the respective restorative material when following the accurate bonding protocol.…”

“…To the best of the authors knowledge, there is no comparable investigation in literature. Some previous studies included a non-contaminated, non-cleaned group as positive control group in their study designs [ 29 , 30 ]. Here, some cleaning protocols resulted in comparable bond strength values to the positive control group after surface contamination and were therefore evaluated as being most effective.…”

“…Irrespective of the restoration material, the effect of the cleaning method on the bonding durability after air-particle abrasion or etching is not well known. Some previous literature tested the effectiveness of different cleaning methods on contaminated zirconia [ 9 , 16 , 17 , 22 , 23 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ], lithium disilicate ceramic [ 9 , 31 , 32 , 33 ] or a resin composite material [ 34 ]. However, the presented outcomes were controversial and mainly focused on the effectiveness of the cleaning method.…”

UV-Mediated Photofunctionalization of Indirect Restorative Materials Enhances Bonding to a Resin-Based Luting Agent

“…The increase of bond strength resulted in mixed and cohesive failures of carbon-adsorbed groups ( Figure 1 ). The relation between decreased contact angle followed by increased adherent surface wettability and increased bond strength was extensively investigated [ 30 , 39 , 40 ].…”