Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.364

Repair bond strengths of non-aged and aged resin nanoceramics  

Subasi, Meryem Gulce (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Aydin University)
Alp, Gulce (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Okan University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics / v.9, no.5, 2017 , pp. 364-370 More about this Journal
Abstract
PURPOSE. To explore the influence of different surface conditionings on surface changes and the influence of surface treatments and aging on the bond strengths of composites to non-aged and aged resin nanoceramics. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Rectangular-shaped non-aged and aged (5000 thermocycles) resin nanoceramic specimens (Lava Ultimate) (n=63, each) were divided into 3 groups according to surface treatments (untreated, air abrasion, or silica coating) (n=21). The surface roughness was measured and scanning electron microscopy was used to examine one specimen from each group. Afterwards, the specimens were repaired with a composite resin (Filtek Z550) and half were sent for aging (5000 thermocycles, n=10, each). Shear bond strengths and failure types were evaluated. Roughness and bond strength were investigated by two- and three-way analysis of variance, respectively. The correlation between the roughness and bond strength was investigated by Pearson's correlation test. RESULTS. Surface-treated samples had higher roughness compared with the untreated specimens (P=.000). For the non-aged resin nanoceramic groups, aging was a significant factor for bond strength; for the aged resin nanoceramic groups, surface treatment and aging were significant factors. The failures were mostly adhesive after thermal cycling, except in the non-aged untreated group and the aged air-abraded group, which had mostly mixed failures. Roughness and bond strength were positively correlated (P=.003). CONCLUSION. Surface treatment is not required for the repair of non-aged resin nanoceramic; for the repair of aged resin nanoceramic restorations, air abrasion is recommended.
Keywords
Bond strength; Repair; Resin nanoceramic; Roughness; Surface treatment;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 El-Damanhoury HM, Haj-Ali RN, Platt JA. Fracture resistance and microleakage of endocrowns utilizing three CADCAM blocks. Oper Dent 2015;40:201-10.   DOI
2 Kramer N, Kunzelmann KH, Taschner M, Mehl A, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R. Antagonist enamel wears more than ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 2006;85:1097-100.   DOI
3 Magne P, Knezevic A. Simulated fatigue resistance of composite resin versus porcelain CAD/CAM overlay restorations on endodontically treated molars. Quintessence Int 2009;40:125-33.
4 Mormann WH, Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Sener B, Attin T, Mehl A. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2013;20:113-25.   DOI
5 Alt V, Hannig M, Wostmann B, Balkenhol M. Fracture strength of temporary fixed partial dentures: CAD/CAM versus directly fabricated restorations. Dent Mater 2011;27:339-47.   DOI
6 Ozcan M, Niedermeier W. Clinical study on the reasons for and location of failures of metal-ceramic restorations and survival of repairs. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:299-302.
7 Duzyol M, Sagsoz O, Polat Sagsoz N, Akgul N, Yildiz M. The Effect of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength Between CAD/CAM Blocks and Composite Resin. J Prosthodont 2016;25:466-71.   DOI
8 Hickel R, Brushaver K, Ilie N. Repair of restorations-criteria for decision making and clinical recommendations. Dent Mater 2013;29:28-50.   DOI
9 Stawarczyk B, Krawczuk A, Ilie N. Tensile bond strength of resin composite repair in vitro using different surface preparation conditionings to an aged CAD/CAM resin nanoceramic. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:299-308.   DOI
10 Wiegand A, Stucki L, Hoffmann R, Attin T, Stawarczyk B. Repairability of CAD/CAM high-density PMMA- and com- posite-based polymers. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19:2007-13.   DOI
11 Gungor MB, Nemli SK, Bal BT, Unver S, Dogan A. Effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to CAD/CAM resin-ceramic hybrid materials. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:259-66.   DOI
12 Wahsh MM, Ghallab OH. Influence of different surface treatments on microshear bond strength of repair resin composite to two CAD/CAM esthetic restorative materials. Tanta Dent J 2015;12:178-84.   DOI
13 Ornaghi BP, Meier MM, Rosa V, Cesar PF, Lohbauer U, Braga RR. Subcritical crack growth and in vitro lifetime prediction of resin composites with different filler distributions. Dent Mater 2012;28:985-95.   DOI
14 Ozcan M, Volpato CA. Surface Conditioning and Bonding Protocol for Nanocomposite Indirect Restorations: How and Why? J Adhes Dent 2016;18:82.
15 Amaral M, Belli R, Cesar PF, Valandro LF, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. The potential of novel primers and universal adhesives to bond to zirconia. J Dent 2014;42:90-8.   DOI
16 Palmer DS, Barco MT, Billy EJ. Temperature extremes produced orally by hot and cold liquids. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:325-7.   DOI
17 Elsaka SE. Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems. Dent Mater J 2015;34:161-7.   DOI
18 Torstenson B, Brannstrom M. Contraction gap under composite resin restorations: effect of hygroscopic expansion and thermal stress. Oper Dent 1988;13:24-31.
19 Quinn GD, Giuseppetti AA, Hoffman KH. Chipping fracture resistance of dental CAD/CAM restorative materials: part I-procedures and results. Dent Mater 2014;30:e99-111.
20 Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 1999;27:89-99.   DOI
21 Bahr N, Keul C, Edelhoff D, Eichberger M, Roos M, Gernet W, Stawarczyk B. Effect of different adhesives combined with two resin composite cements on shear bond strength to polymeric CAD/CAM materials. Dent Mater J 2013;32:492-501.   DOI
22 Zahran M, El-Mowafy O, Tam L, Watson PA, Finer Y. Fracture strength and fatigue resistance of all-ceramic molar crowns manufactured with CAD/CAM technology. J Prosthodont 2008;17:370-7.   DOI
23 Giordano R. Materials for chairside CAD/CAM-produced restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:14S-21S.
24 Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J 2009;28:44-56.   DOI
25 Kois DE, Isvilanonda V, Chaiyabutr Y, Kois JC. Evaluation of fracture resistance and failure risks of posterior partial coverage restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2013;25:110-22.   DOI
26 Sripetchdanond J, Leevailoj C. Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1141-50.   DOI
27 Fasbinder DJ. Materials for chairside CAD/CAM restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2010;31:702-4, 706, 708-9.
28 Belli R, Geinzer E, Muschweck A, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Mechanical fatigue degradation of ceramics versus resin composites for dental restorations. Dent Mater 2014;30:424-32.   DOI
29 Coldea A, Swain MV, Thiel N. Mechanical properties of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network materials. Dent Mater 2013; 29:419-26.   DOI
30 Acar O, Yilmaz B, Altintas SH, Chandrasekaran I, Johnston WM. Color stainability of CAD/CAM and nanocomposite resin materials. J Prosthet Dent 2016;115:71-5.   DOI