Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.322

Bonding of conventional provisional resin to 3D printed resin: the role of surface treatments and type of repair resins  

Lim, Na-Kyung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
Shin, Soo-Yeon (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics / v.12, no.5, 2020 , pp. 322-328 More about this Journal
Abstract
PURPOSE. This study evaluated the shear bond strength between 3D printed provisional resin and conventional provisional resin depending on type of conventional provisional resin and different surface treatments of 3D printed resin. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety-six disc-shaped specimens (Ø14 mm × 20 mm thickness) were printed with resin for 3D printing (Nextdent C&B, Vertex-Dental B. V., Soesterberg, Netherlands). After post-processing, the specimens were randomly divided into 8 groups (n=12) according to two types of conventional repair resin (methylmethacrylate and bis-acryl composite) and four different surface treatments: no additional treatment, air abrasion, soaking in methylmethacrylate (MMA) monomer, and soaking in MMA monomer after air abrasion. After surface treatment, each repair resin was bonded in cylindrical shape using a silicone mold. Specimens were stored in 37℃ distilled water for 24 hours. The shear bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Failure modes were analyzed by scanning electron microscope. Statistical analysis was done using one-way ANOVA test and Kruskal-Wallis test (α=.05). RESULTS. The group repaired with bis-acryl composite without additional surface treatment showed the highest mean shear bond strength. It was significantly higher than all four groups repaired with methylmethacrylate (P<.05). Additional surface treatments, neither mechanical nor chemical, increased the shear bond strength within methylmethacrylate groups and bis-acryl composite groups (P>.05). Failure mode analysis showed that cohesive failure was most frequent in both methylmethacrylate and bis-acryl composite groups. CONCLUSION. Our results suggest that when repairing 3D printed provisional restoration with conventional provisional resin, repair with bis-acryl composite without additional surface treatment is recommended.
Keywords
3D printing; Provisional restoration; Shear bond strength; Surface treatment;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Mainjot AK, Dupont NM, Oudkerk JC, Dewael TY, Sadoun MJ. From artisanal to CAD-CAM blocks: State of the art of indirect composites. J Dent Res 2016;95:487-95.   DOI
2 Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204:505-11.   DOI
3 Gilbert S, Keul C, Roos M, Edelhoff D, Stawarczyk B. Bonding between CAD/CAM resin and resin composite cements dependent on bonding agents: three different in vitro test methods. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:227-36.   DOI
4 Strub JR, Rekow ED, Witkowski S. Computer-aided design and fabrication of dental restorations: current systems and future possibilities. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:1289-96.   DOI
5 Kessler A, Hickel R, Reymus M. 3D Printing in Dentistry-State of the Art. Oper Dent 2020;45:30-40.   DOI
6 van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater 2012;28:3-12.   DOI
7 Tahayeri A, Morgan M, Fugolin AP, Bompolaki D, Athirasala A, Pfeifer CS, Ferracane JL, Bertassoni LE. 3D printed versus conventionally cured provisional crown and bridge dental materials. Dent Mater 2018;34:192-200.   DOI
8 Burns DR, Beck DA, Nelson SK; Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. A review of selected dental literature on contemporary provisional fixed prosthodontic treatment: report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:474-97.   DOI
9 Koumjian JH, Nimmo A. Evaluation of fracture resistance of resins used for provisional restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:654-7.   DOI
10 Revilla-Leon M, Meyers MJ, Zandinejad A, Ozcan M. A review on chemical composition, mechanical properties, and manufacturing work flow of additively manufactured current polymers for interim dental restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:51-7.   DOI
11 Jeong KW, Kim SH. Influence of surface treatments and repair materials on the shear bond strength of CAD/CAM provisional restorations. J Adv Prosthodont 2019;11:95-104.   DOI
12 Mondragon E, Soderholm KJ. Shear strength of dentin and dentin bonded composites. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:227-36.
13 Oliveira AC, Oshima HM, Mota EG, Grossi ML. Influence of chisel width on shear bond strength of composite to enamel. Revista Odonto Ciencia 2009;24: 19-21.
14 Sinhoreti MA, Consani S, De Goes MF, Sobrinho LC, Knowles JC. Influence of loading types on the shear strength of the dentin-resin interface bonding. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2001;12:39-44.   DOI
15 da Costa TR, Serrano AM, Atman AP, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Durability of composite repair using different surface treatments. J Dent 2012;40:513-21.   DOI
16 Ha SR, Kim SH, Lee JB, Han JS and Yeo IS. Improving shear bond strength of temporary crown and fixed dental prosthesis resins by surface treatments. J Mater Sci 2016;51:1463-75.   DOI
17 Gilbert S, Keul C, Roos M, Edelhoff D, Stawarczyk B. Bonding between CAD/CAM resin and resin composite cements dependent on bonding agents: three different in vitro test methods. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:227-36.   DOI
18 Brosh T, Pilo R, Bichacho N, Blutstein R. Effect of combinations of surface treatments and bonding agents on the bond strength of repaired composites. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:122-6.   DOI
19 Papacchini F, Magni E, Radovic I, Mazzitelli C, Monticellia F, Goracci C, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. Effect of intermediate agents and pre-heating of repairing resin on composite-repair bonds. Oper Dent 2007;32:363-71.   DOI
20 Papazoglou E, Vasilas AI. Shear bond strengths for composite and autopolymerized acrylic resins bonded to acrylic resin denture teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:573-8.   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 Keul C, Martin A, Wimmer T, Roos M, Gernet W and Stawarczyk B. Tensile bond strength of PMMA- and composite-based CAD/CAM materials to luting cements after different conditioning methods. Inter J Adhe Adhe 2013;46:122-7.   DOI
23 Hisamatsu N, Atsuta M, Matsumura H. Effect of silane primers and unfilled resin bonding agents on repair bond strength of a prosthodontic microfilled composite. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:644-8.   DOI
24 Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC, Sorensen JA. In vitro shear bond strength of cementing agents to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:265-73.   DOI
25 Vallittu PK, Lassila VP and Lappalainen R. Wetting the repair surface with methylmethacrylate affects the transverse strength of repaired heat-polymerized resin. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:639-43.   DOI
26 Palitsch A, Hannig M, Ferger P, Balkenhol M. Bonding of acrylic denture teeth to MMA/PMMA and light-curing denture base materials: the role of conditioning liquids. J Dent 2012;40:210-21.   DOI
27 Torstenson B, Brannstrom M. Contraction gap under composite resin restorations: effect of hygroscopic expansion and thermal stress. Oper Dent 1988;13:24-31.