Influence of different adherend materials and combinations on in vitro shear bond strength

Abstract

The influence of different adherend and substrate materials on shear bond strength (SBS) test was estimated. Ceramic plates (IPS e.max press) were cut, polished, abraded, and applied with two resin cements (Panavia F/Biscem). The SBS values of 30 groups were measured. The groups consisted of five combinations of adherend and substrate materials for each adhesive system and three different bonded areas (2, 4, and 6 mm diameter) for each combination. The failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope. Groups with ceramic adherends showed higher SBS values in both adhesive systems and all three bonded areas. Small bonded areas are associated with significantly high SBS values. Groups with similar bonded areas and high SBS values showed more mixed or cohesive failures. Groups with small bonded areas and high SBS values had more interfacial failures. Adherend and substrate material significantly influenced the in vitro SBS value.

Adhesion of Resin-Resin and Resin–Lithium Disilicate Ceramic: A Methodological Assessment

“…The adhesion of resin composite to ceramic vs. resin composite showed a significant difference for the test methods SBT and µTBT. These findings are consistent with one other study (SBT) in which different substrate materials showed a significant effect on the SBS [ 29 ]. µTBT showed the most indicative outcomes for composite adhesion to both composite and ceramic, and associated failure mode.…”

“…Bonding of glass ceramics to resin composite showed for µSBT (6.6 ± 1 MPa) B the lowest and µTBT (24.8 ± 7 MPa) C,D the highest test values (SBT (14.6 ± 5 MPa) A,D and in between TBT (19.9 ± 5 MPa) A,B ) ( p < 0.05). Shear bond strength, when alternating adherent and substrate of glass ceramic and composite, was shown to be affected by the type of adherent-substrates assembly [ 29 ] and by the size of bonded area. Previous studies have demonstrated that the bonded area and bond strength are adversely correlated, which is not the case in our study, where SBT is higher than microSBT for both [ 29 ].…”

“…Shear bond strength, when alternating adherent and substrate of glass ceramic and composite, was shown to be affected by the type of adherent-substrates assembly [ 29 ] and by the size of bonded area. Previous studies have demonstrated that the bonded area and bond strength are adversely correlated, which is not the case in our study, where SBT is higher than microSBT for both [ 29 ]. As regards ceramic–composite failure mode for SBT, TBT, and µSBT, 90–100% of the specimens for these tests showed a mixed fracture pattern, namely, a combination of adhesive and cohesive failure in the bonding interface and resin composite.…”

“…The difference of elastic moduli between an adherent and substrates can contribute to the dissimilar results in bond strength. Different mechanical performance (SBS) was shown with mismatched elastic moduli of adherent and substrates [ 29 ]. Additionally, localised stress concentration at the bonding interface can result from the mismatch of the elastic moduli of adherent and substrates [ 35 , 36 ].…”

“…External load shrinkage strain can be redirected towards the substrate when bonded to an adherent with a higher elastic modulus. On the other hand, adherents with low elastic modulus are less likely to redistributed stains and rather show tensile cracking as a result of restrained shrinkage [ 29 , 34 ].…”