The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제7권6호
  • /
  • Pages.446-453
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Bonding values of two contemporary ceramic inlay materials to dentin following simulated aging

  • 투고 : 2015.05.05
  • 심사 : 2015.10.29
  • 발행 : 2015.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. To compare the push-out bond strength of feldspar and zirconia-based ceramic inlays bonded to dentin with different resin cements following simulated aging. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Occlusal cavities in 80 extracted molars were restored in 2 groups (n=40) with CAD/CAM feldspar (Vitablocs Trilux forte) (FP) and zirconia-based (Ceramill Zi) (ZR) ceramic inlays. The fabricated inlays were luted in 2 subgroups (n=20) with either etch-and-bond (RelyX Ultimate Clicker) (EB) or self-adhesive (RelyX Unicem Aplicap) (SA) resin cement. Ten inlays in each subgroup were subjected to 3,500 thermal cycles and 24,000 loading cycles, while the other 10 served as control. Horizontal 3 mm thick specimens were cut out of the restored teeth for push out bond strength testing. Bond strength data were statistically analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and Tukey's comparisons at ${\alpha}=.05$. The mode of ceramic-cement-dentin bond failure for each specimen was also assessed. RESULTS. No statistically significant differences were noticed between FP and ZR bond strength to dentin in all subgroups (ANOVA, P=.05113). No differences were noticed between EB and SA (Tukey's, P>.05) bonded to either type of ceramics. Both adhesive and mixed modes of bond failure were dominant for non-aged inlays. Simulated aging had no significant effect on bond strength values (Tukey's, P>.05) of all ceramic-cement combinations although the adhesive mode of bond failure became more common (60-80%) in aged inlays. CONCLUSION. The suggested cement-ceramic combinations offer comparable bonding performance to dentin substrate either before or after simulated aging that seems to have no adverse effect on the achieved bond.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Banks RG. Conservative posterior ceramic restorations: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:619-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90316-5
  2. Hopp CD, Land MF. Considerations for ceramic inlays in posterior teeth: a review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2013;5:21-32.
  3. Kawai K, Hayashi M, Torii M, Tsuchitani Y. Marginal adaptability and fit of ceramic milled inlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:1414-9. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1995.0053
  4. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M. Marginal adaptation and fit of adhesive ceramic inlays. J Dent 1993;21:39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(93)90048-U
  5. Thordrup M, Isidor F, Horsted-Bindslev P. Comparison of marginal fit and microleakage of ceramic and composite inlays: an in vitro study. J Dent 1994;22:147-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(94)90198-8
  6. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int 1990;21:823-31.
  7. Leinfelder KF. Porcelain esthetics for the 21st century. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131 :47S-51S. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0402
  8. Tyas MJ. Dental amalgam-what are the alternatives?. Int Dent J 1994;44:303-8.
  9. Beier US, Kapferer I, Dumfahrt H. Clinical long-term evaluation and failure characteristics of 1,335 all-ceramic restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2012;25:70-8.
  10. Critchlow S. Ceramic materials have similar short term survival rates to other materials on posterior teeth. Evid Based Dent 2012;13:49. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400860
  11. Molin M, Karlsson S. The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlay systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1993;51:201-6. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359309040568
  12. Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Interface dimensions of CEREC-2 MOD inlays. Dent Mater 2000;16:68-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00089-5
  13. Nathanson D. Etched porcelain restorations for improved esthetics, part II: Onlays. Compendium 1987;8:105-10.
  14. Jensen ME, Sheth JJ, Tolliver D. Etched-porcelain resinbonded full-veneer crowns: in vitro fracture resistance. Compendium 1989;10:336-8, 340-1, 344-7.
  15. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int 1990;21:823-31.
  16. Llobell A, Nicholls JI, Kois JC, Daly CH. Fatigue life of porcelain repair systems. Int J Prosthodont 1992;5:205-13.
  17. Abdelaziz KM, Al-Qahtani NM, Al-Shehri AS, Abdelmoneam AM. Bonding quality of contemporary dental cements to sandblasted esthetic crown copings. J Investig Clin Dent 2012;3:142-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-1626.2011.00106.x
  18. Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Schaible RB, Nikolaenko SA, Naumann M. Luting of ceramic inlays in vitro: marginal quality of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives versus selfetch cements. Dent Mater 2008;24:185-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.04.003
  19. Taschner M, Kramer N, Lohbauer U, Pelka M, Breschi L, Petschelt A, Frankenberger R. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays luted with self-adhesive resin cement: a 2-year in vivo study. Dent Mater 2012;28:535-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.12.002
  20. Santos MJ, Mondelli RF, Navarro MF, Francischone CE, Rubo JH, Santos GC Jr. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: five-year follow-up. Oper Dent 2013;38:3-11. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-039-C
  21. Frankenberger R, Taschner M, Garcia-Godoy F, Petschelt A, Kramer N. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after 12 years. J Adhes Dent 2008;10:393-8.
  22. Sjogren G, Molin M, van Dijken JW. A 10-year prospective evaluation of CAD/CAM-manufactured (Cerec) ceramic inlays cemented with a chemically cured or dual-cured resin composite. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:241-6.
  23. Kramer N, Frankenberger R. Clinical performance of bonded leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years. Dent Mater 2005;21:262-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.009
  24. Guarda GB, Correr AB, Goncalves LS, Costa AR, Borges GA, Sinhoreti MA, Correr-Sobrinho L. Effects of surface treatments, thermocycling, and cyclic loading on the bond strength of a resin cement bonded to a lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Oper Dent 2013;38:208-17. https://doi.org/10.2341/11-076-L
  25. Zorzin J, Belli R, Wagner A, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Selfadhesive resin cements: adhesive performance to indirect restorative ceramics. J Adhes Dent 2014;16:541-6.
  26. Stawarczyk B, Ozcan M, Hallmann L, Ender A, Mehl A, Hammerlet CH. The effect of zirconia sintering temperature on flexural strength, grain size, and contrast ratio. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:269-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0692-6
  27. Flury S, Lussi A, Peutzfeldt A, Zimmerli B. Push-out bond strength of CAD/CAM-ceramic luted to dentin with self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 2010;26:855-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.05.001
  28. Heintze SD, Faouzi M, Rousson V, Ozcan M. Correlation of wear in vivo and six laboratory wear methods. Dent Mater 2012;28:961-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.006
  29. Subramanian D, Sivagami G, Sendhilnathan D, Rajmohan C. Effect of thermocycling on the flexural strength of porcelain laminate veneers. J Conserv Dent 2008;11:144-9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.48835
  30. Hashem AA, Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, Fouda MY. The effect of different irrigating solutions on bond strength of two root canal-filling systems. J Endod 2009;35:537-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.01.003
  31. Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Clinical performance of CEREC ceramic inlays: a systematic review. Dent Mater 1999;15:54-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00014-7
  32. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int 1990;21:823-31.
  33. Soares CJ, Santana FR, Castro CG, Santos-Filho PC, Soares PV, Qian F, Armstrong SR. Finite element analysis and bond strength of a glass post to intraradicular dentin: comparison between microtensile and push-out tests. Dent Mater 2008;24:1405-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.004
  34. Cheylan JM, Gonthier S, Degrange M. In vitro push-out strength of seven luting agents to dentin. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:365-70.
  35. Queiroz JR, Souza RO, Nogueira Junior L Jr, Ozcan M, Bottino MA. Influence of acid-etching and ceramic primers on the repair of a glass ceramic. Gen Dent 2012;60:e79-85.
  36. Souza RO, Castilho AA, Fernandes VV, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Durability of microtensile bond to nonetched and etched feldspar ceramic: self-adhesive resin cements vs conventional resin. J Adhes Dent 2011;13:155-62.
  37. Valandro LF, Ozcan M, Bottino MC, Bottino MA, Scotti R, Bona AD. Bond strength of a resin cement to high-alumina and zirconia-reinforced ceramics: the effect of surface conditioning. J Adhes Dent 2006;8:175-81.
  38. Viotti RG, Kasaz A, Pena CE, Alexandre RS, Arrais CA, Reis AF. Microtensile bond strength of new self-adhesive luting agents and conventional multistep systems. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102:306-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60180-3
  39. Feitosa SA, Corazza PH, Cesar PF, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Pressable feldspathic inlays in premolars: effect of cementation strategy and mechanical cycling on the adhesive bond between dentin and restoration. J Adhes Dent 2014;16:147-54.
  40. Kious AR, Roberts HW, Brackett WW. Film thicknesses of recently introduced luting cements. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:189-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60026-3
  41. Amaral R, Ozcan M, Valandro LF, Balducci I, Bottino MA. Effect of conditioning methods on the microtensile bond strength of phosphate monomer-based cement on zirconia ceramic in dry and aged conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008;85:1-9.
  42. Wegner SM, Gerdes W, Kern M. Effect of different artificial aging conditions on ceramic-composite bond strength. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:267-72.
  43. Vanderlei A, Passos SP, Ozcan M, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Durability of adhesion between feldspathic ceramic and resin cements: effect of adhesive resin, polymerization mode of resin cement, and aging. J Prosthodont 2013;22:196-202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00934.x
  44. Osorio R, Castillo-de Oyague R, Monticelli F, Osorio E, Toledano M. Resistance to bond degradation between dualcure resin cements and pre-treated sintered CAD-CAM dental ceramics. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012;17:e669-77.
  45. Kumbuloglu O, Lassila LV, User A, Vallittu PK. Bonding of resin composite luting cements to zirconium oxide by two air-particle abrasion methods. Oper Dent 2006;31:248-55. https://doi.org/10.2341/05-22
  46. Tanaka R, Fujishima A, Shibata Y, Manabe A, Miyazaki T. Cooperation of phosphate monomer and silica modification on zirconia. J Dent Res 2008;87:666-70. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910808700705
  47. Gomes AL, Ramos JC, Santos-del Riego S, Montero J, Albaladejo A. Thermocycling effect on microshear bond strength to zirconia ceramic using Er:YAG and tribochemical silica coating as surface conditioning. Lasers Med Sci 2015;30:787-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-013-1433-z
  48. Flury S, Lussi A, Peutzfeldt A, Zimmerli B. Push-out bond strength of CAD/CAM-ceramic luted to dentin with self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 2010;26:855-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.05.001
  49. Aleisa KI, Almufleh BS, Morgano SM, Lynch CD. Effect of types of luting agent on push-out bond strength of zirconium oxide posts. J Dent 2013;41:377-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.01.011
  50. Saavedra G, Ariki EK, Federico CD, Galhano G, Zamboni S, Baldissara P, Valandro LF. Effect of acid neutralization and mechanical cycling on the microtensile bond strength of glass-ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 2009;34:211-6. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-68

피인용 문헌

  1. Novel Cavity Disinfectants Containing Quaternary Ammonium Monomer Dimethylaminododecyl Methacrylate vol.9, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9080674