The Effect of Surface Treatment of the Interfacial Surface on Fatigue‐Related Microtensile Bond Strength of Milled Zirconia to Veneering Porcelain

Abstract

Airborne particle abrasion of the interfacial surface of the Everest® Y-TZP core significantly decreased the MTBS to ZirPress veneering porcelain when compared to no interfacial surface treatment. Application of ZirLiner to the interfacial surface of the Everest® Y-TZP core did not significantly increase or decrease the MTBS to ZirPress veneering porcelain, compared to the other surface treatments. Cyclic loading did not affect bond strengths in any of the groups, regardless of surface treatment. Neither cyclic loading nor surface treatment affected the failure mode of the specimens.

Low-Fusing Porcelain Glaze Application on 3Y-TZP Surfaces can Enhance Zirconia-Porcelain Adhesion

“…Surface treatments have been studied on zirconia to improve bond compatibility between the two ceramics and appear to be important to improving bond strength (13,(15)(16)(17)(18)(19). The present work found that porcelain glaze application on the zirconia core before veneering porcelain cylinder build-up promoted zirconia-porcelain bond improvements, while the untreated group showed the lower bond strength result.…”

Sol–gel dip coating of yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia dental ceramic by aluminosilicate nanocomposite as a novel technique to improve the bonding of veneering porcelain

“…There is a general agreement among studies that sandblasting of Y-TZP has negative effect on the bond strength of veneering porcelain. 3,24,26,27 This destructive effect has been related to the tetragonal to monoclinic solid phase transformation, induced by the collision of alumina particles during sandblasting. 10,24,26,27 Significantly lower CTE in monoclinic form may induce tensile (rather than compressive) stresses at the surface layer, which causes failure in lower shear stresses.…”

“…3,24,26,27 This destructive effect has been related to the tetragonal to monoclinic solid phase transformation, induced by the collision of alumina particles during sandblasting. 10,24,26,27 Significantly lower CTE in monoclinic form may induce tensile (rather than compressive) stresses at the surface layer, which causes failure in lower shear stresses. 25 Wang et al also have mentioned that the toughness of zirconia/veneer interface without any treatment is significantly higher than that of interfaces subjected to airborne-particle abrasion.…”

“…9 Other previous studies also have shown the weaken interface between Y-TZP and layering ceramics after sandblasting surface treatment. 24,[28][29][30] So, it can be said that although sandblasting increases the surface roughness and bond area, the effect of resulted mechanical retention may not outweigh the influence of the mechanical and thermal residual stresses. 8 Maximum bond strength values were obtained in aluminosilicate-coated followed by silica-coated samples.…”

Shear bond strength of veneering porcelain to porous zirconia

“…There are two contradictory types of reports concerning the effect of sandblasting on a zirconia surface: one says that sandblasting improves bond strength 20,21) ; the other says that sandblasting does not affect bond strength 22,23) . The reasons for these contradictory conclusions about sandblasting may to be: (1) different types and sizes of blasting particles or levels of injection pressure could have different effects on the zirconia surface; and (2) sandblasting would change some of the crystals on the zirconia surface from tetragonal to monoclinic 24) .…”