Abstract:Objective
To evaluate the influence of saliva contamination and cleaning procedures on shear bond strength (SBS) of a self‐adhesive resin cement (SAC) to zirconia surfaces.
Materials and Methods
A total of 160 sandblasted zirconia blocks were randomly divided into eight groups as follows: No saliva contamination, no cleansing (NC‐NC); contamination with saliva, no cleansing (SC‐NC); no saliva contamination, cleansing with a zirconia primer (ZP; Z‐Bond, Danville Materials, Inc., S. Ramon, California) (NC‐ZP); c… Show more
“…However, this interaction is absent when ZrO 2 and HF are in contact. Instead, HF interacts with the organic contaminants and dissolves them from the zirconia surface 21 . Phosphoric acid also reacts with organic contaminants to remove them from a ceramic surface.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, HF interacts with the organic contaminants and dissolves them from the zirconia surface. 21 Phosphoric acid also reacts with organic contaminants to remove them from a ceramic surface. However, when phosphoric acid comes in contact with zirconia, an interaction between the ZrO 2 and P occurs, leaving an inorganic P residue on the surface.…”
Purpose
To evaluate resin cement bond strength after removal of salivary contamination from a zirconia surface using different cleaning solutions and air‐borne particle abrasion.
Materials and methods
One‐hundred and twenty zirconia specimens (KATANA STML, Noritake) were prepared and divided into 12 groups (n = 10). Groups were subjected to a notched‐edge shear bond strength test (ISO 29022) to analyze the bonding efficiency of a resin cement (Panavia V5, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) before and after contamination with saliva. Group 1 (control) was prepared and cemented without salivary contamination. Group 2 was coated with ceramic primer (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) then subjected to salivary contamination then tested. Group 3 was contaminated, cleaned by air‐borne particle abrasion, ceramic primer and resin cement applied, and tested. Groups 4 to 12 were contaminated, and then different cleaning solutions (water, 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, 35% phosphoric acid, Ivoclean, KATANA cleaner, Zirclean, sodium hypochlorite 4%, and 7.5%) were used to decontaminate the zirconia surface, followed by ceramic primer, resin cement application, and tested. One‐way ANOVA and Tukey post‐hoc analysis was used to analyze the data.
Results
One‐way ANOVA showed statistical differences among cleaning procedures (p < 0.001, F = 13.48). Air‐borne particle abrasion was the only group which provided a bond strength (21 ± 2.8 MPa) that was not statistically different than the control group in which no contamination occurred (25.3 ± 3.3 MPa) (p = 0.247). The use of hydrofluoric acid and zirconia cleaning solutions resulted in bond strengths values which were not statistically different from each other (17.5‐19.1 MPa).
Conclusion
Air‐borne particle, zirconia cleaning solutions and hydrofluoric acid are feasible to decontaminate the zirconia surface from saliva prior to bonding the restoration.
“…However, this interaction is absent when ZrO 2 and HF are in contact. Instead, HF interacts with the organic contaminants and dissolves them from the zirconia surface 21 . Phosphoric acid also reacts with organic contaminants to remove them from a ceramic surface.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, HF interacts with the organic contaminants and dissolves them from the zirconia surface. 21 Phosphoric acid also reacts with organic contaminants to remove them from a ceramic surface. However, when phosphoric acid comes in contact with zirconia, an interaction between the ZrO 2 and P occurs, leaving an inorganic P residue on the surface.…”
Purpose
To evaluate resin cement bond strength after removal of salivary contamination from a zirconia surface using different cleaning solutions and air‐borne particle abrasion.
Materials and methods
One‐hundred and twenty zirconia specimens (KATANA STML, Noritake) were prepared and divided into 12 groups (n = 10). Groups were subjected to a notched‐edge shear bond strength test (ISO 29022) to analyze the bonding efficiency of a resin cement (Panavia V5, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) before and after contamination with saliva. Group 1 (control) was prepared and cemented without salivary contamination. Group 2 was coated with ceramic primer (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc.) then subjected to salivary contamination then tested. Group 3 was contaminated, cleaned by air‐borne particle abrasion, ceramic primer and resin cement applied, and tested. Groups 4 to 12 were contaminated, and then different cleaning solutions (water, 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, 35% phosphoric acid, Ivoclean, KATANA cleaner, Zirclean, sodium hypochlorite 4%, and 7.5%) were used to decontaminate the zirconia surface, followed by ceramic primer, resin cement application, and tested. One‐way ANOVA and Tukey post‐hoc analysis was used to analyze the data.
Results
One‐way ANOVA showed statistical differences among cleaning procedures (p < 0.001, F = 13.48). Air‐borne particle abrasion was the only group which provided a bond strength (21 ± 2.8 MPa) that was not statistically different than the control group in which no contamination occurred (25.3 ± 3.3 MPa) (p = 0.247). The use of hydrofluoric acid and zirconia cleaning solutions resulted in bond strengths values which were not statistically different from each other (17.5‐19.1 MPa).
Conclusion
Air‐borne particle, zirconia cleaning solutions and hydrofluoric acid are feasible to decontaminate the zirconia surface from saliva prior to bonding the restoration.
“…Among possible adhesion inhibitors, saliva contamination is frequently encountered in clinical situations and may be one of the main reasons for decreased bond strength [6]. Because organic deposits remain on the tooth surface even after rinsing with water, saliva contamination affects the bond performance of resin composite luting systems [8].…”
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immediate shear bond strength of resin composite luting systems to tooth with or without saliva contamination in different curing modes. The Knoop hardness number of the resin composite luting agents was measured. Four combinations of resin composite luting systems were used. The shear bond strength to bovine teeth was measured with and without saliva contamination in different curing modes at different storage periods. The Knoop hardness number of the resin composite luting agents was also evaluated. Significantly lower enamel and dentin shear bond strengths and Knoop hardness number values were observed in all resin composite luting systems at 5 min versus 24 h, regardless of the curing mode or saliva contamination. The influence of the curing mode of the resin composite luting systems on shear bond strengths and Knoop hardness number was dependent on material. For the saliva contamination conditions, only G-CEM ONE EM did not show any significant difference in shear bond strength among the groups with and without saliva contamination, regardless of curing mode, storage period, or tooth substrate. All the resin composite luting systems showed lower shear bond strengths and Knoop hardness number values immediately after setting.
“…[16][17][18][19] Bu nedenle kontaminasyonun önlenmesi önemlidir. Simantasyondan önce kontamine yüzeylerin farklı temizleme protokolleri ile (su spreyi 17,[20][21][22] , alkol (%70-96 izopropanol) 13,23 , zirkonya primeri 24 , plazma 23,25 , İvoclean 17 ya da tekrar kumlama 14,26,27 ) temizlenmesi önerilebilmektedir. Ayrıca, bir çok klinisyen, dezenfektan bir solüsyon olan %70'lik etanolü temizleme protokolünde kullanmaktadır.…”
Bu çalışmanın amacı, CAD/CAM yüzeylerinde gerçekleştirilen yapıştırma prosedürünün farklı aşamalarında gerçekleşen tükürük kontaminasyonun, su ya da etanol ile temizlenmesinin bağlanma dayanıma etkisini incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Cerasmart (GC) ve Shofu Block (Shofu) CAD/CAM materyallerden (772 mm) hazırlanan örnekler, otopolimerizan akrilik ile sabitlendi. Örneklerin yüzeyleri Al2O3 kum ile kumlandı, arkasından çalışma protokollerine göre şu şekilde gruplara ayrıldı: Grup-1(kontrol): Firma önerisi yapıştırma protokolü (Primer/Siman/Kompozit), Grup-2: Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / Su ile temizleme/Primer/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-3: Tükürükkontaminasyonu / %70 etanol ile temizleme /Primer/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-4: Primeruygulaması/ Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / Su ile temizleme / Tekrar primeruygulaması/Siman/Kompozit, Grup-5: Primer-uygulaması / Tükürük-kontaminasyonu / %70 etanol ile temizleme / Tekrar-primer uygulaması /Siman/Kompozit. Her grup için CAD/CAM materyallere primer olarak Z-Prime Plus 10 sn uygulandı. Ardından hazırlanan kompozit rezinler (Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray), dual-cured rezin siman (Duo-Link Universal Light Curing Resin Cement, BİSCO) aracılığıyla yapıştırıldı. Örnekler 24 saat 37 o C suda bekletildi ve bağlanma dayanım testine tabi tutuldu. Veriler tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve Tukey HSD testi kullanılarak analiz edildi (p<0.05).Bulgular: En yüksek bağlanma dayanımı değeri Cerasmart Grup-1'de (19.865.27.), en düşük bağlanma dayanımı değeri Shofu Block HC Grup-5'te (13.024.83) bulundu (p=0.67).Tükürük kontaminasyonun primer uygulamasından önce veya sonra gerçekleşmesi bağlanma dayanım değerlerini etkilemedi. Her iki materyal içinde dekontaminasyon işleminin su ya da %70 etanol ile gerçekleştirilmesi arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık bulunmadı.Sonuç: Kontaminasyonun primer uygulamasından önce veya sonra meydana gelmesinin bağlanma dayanımına etkisi bulunmamaktadır. Uygulanan her iki dekontaminasyon yöntemi de klinik olarak yeterli bağlanma dayanımı sağlamaktadır. Primer kullanımı, gelişmiş bağlanma dayanımı değerleri üzerinde etkilidir.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.