J Adv Prosthodont.  2015 Dec;7(6):446-453. 10.4047/jap.2015.7.6.446.

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

• Khalil AA
• Abdelaziz

• KMID: 2176619
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2015.7.6.446

Abstract

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.

Keyword

Inlays; Bonding; Ceramics; Resin cement; Dentin

MeSH Terms

Adhesives
Aging*
Ceramics*
Dentin*
Inlays*
Molar
Resin Cements
Tooth
Adhesives
Ceramics
Resin Cements

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Preparation of occlusal cavities (The dotted line indicates the standardized leveling of cavity depth).

• 

  Fig. 2 Calculation of the bonded surface area.

• 

  Fig. 3 Testing push-out bond strength (A) Stressing test specimens on compression, (B) Flat-ended indenter and (C) test specimen.

• 

  Fig. 4 Recorded modes of bond failure. (A) Mixed failure (white arrow indicates dentin substrate and the black arrow indicates cement material), (B) Adhesive bond failure at dentin-cement interface (white arrow indicates dentin substrate), (C) Adhesive failure at ceramic-cement interface (black arrow indicates cement material).

Reference

1. Banks RG. Conservative posterior ceramic restorations: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 63:619–626.

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; 126:1414–1419.

4. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M. Marginal adaptation and fit of adhesive ceramic inlays. J Dent. 1993; 21:39–46.

5. Thordrup M, Isidor F, Hörsted-Bindslev P. Comparison of marginal fit and microleakage of ceramic and composite inlays: an in vitro study. J Dent. 1994; 22:147–153.

6. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int. 1990; 21:823–831.

7. Leinfelder KF. Porcelain esthetics for the 21st century. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000; 131:47S–51S.

8. Tyas MJ. Dental amalgam-what are the alternatives? Int Dent J. 1994; 44:303–308.

9. Beier US, Kapferer I, Dumfahrt H. Clinical long-term evaluation and failure characteristics of 1,335 all-ceramic restorations. Int J Prosthodont. 2012; 25:70–78.

10. Critchlow S. Ceramic materials have similar short term survival rates to other materials on posterior teeth. Evid Based Dent. 2012; 13:49.

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; 51:201–206.

12. Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Interface dimensions of CEREC-2 MOD inlays. Dent Mater. 2000; 16:68–74.

13. Nathanson D. Etched porcelain restorations for improved esthetics, part II: Onlays. Compendium. 1987; 8:105–110.

14. Jensen ME, Sheth JJ, Tolliver D. Etched-porcelain resinbonded full-veneer crowns: in vitro fracture resistance. Compendium. 1989; 10:336–338. 340–341. 344–347.

15. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int. 1990; 21:823–831.

16. Llobell A, Nicholls JI, Kois JC, Daly CH. Fatigue life of porcelain repair systems. Int J Prosthodont. 1992; 5:205–213.

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; 3:142–147.

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 self-etch cements. Dent Mater. 2008; 24:185–191.

19. Taschner M, Krämer 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; 28:535–540.

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.

21. Frankenberger R, Taschner M, Garcia-Godoy F, Petschelt A, Krämer N. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after 12 years. J Adhes Dent. 2008; 10:393–398.

22. Sjgren 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; 17:241–246.

23. Krämer N, Frankenberger R. Clinical performance of bonded leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:262–271.

24. Guarda GB, Correr AB, Gonçalves 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; 38:208–217.

25. Zorzin J, Belli R, Wagner A, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Self-adhesive resin cements: adhesive performance to indirect restorative ceramics. J Adhes Dent. 2014; 16:541–546.

26. Stawarczyk B, Ozcan M, Hallmann L, Ender A, Mehl A, Hämmerlet CH. The effect of zirconia sintering temperature on flexural strength, grain size, and contrast ratio. Clin Oral Investig. 2013; 17:269–274.

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; 26:855–863.

28. Heintze SD, Faouzi M, Rousson V, Ozcan M. Correlation of wear in vivo and six laboratory wear methods. Dent Mater. 2012; 28:961–973.

29. Subramanian D, Sivagami G, Sendhilnathan D, Rajmohan C. Effect of thermocycling on the flexural strength of porcelain laminate veneers. J Conserv Dent. 2008; 11:144–149.

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; 35:537–540.

31. Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM. Clinical performance of CEREC ceramic inlays: a systematic review. Dent Mater. 1999; 15:54–61.

32. Dietschi D, Maeder M, Meyer JM, Holz J. In vitro resistance to fracture of porcelain inlays bonded to tooth. Quintessence Int. 1990; 21:823–831.

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; 24:1405–1411.

34. Cheylan JM, Gonthier S, Degrange M. In vitro push-out strength of seven luting agents to dentin. Int J Prosthodont. 2002; 15:365–370.

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–e85.

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; 13:155–162.

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; 8:175–181.

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; 102:306–312.

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; 16:147–154.

40. Kious AR, Roberts HW, Brackett WW. Film thicknesses of recently introduced luting cements. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 101:189–192.

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; 15:267–272.

43. Vanderlei A, Passos SP, Özcan 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.

44. Osorio R, Castillo-de Oyagüe 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–e677.

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; 31:248–255.

46. Tanaka R, Fujishima A, Shibata Y, Manabe A, Miyazaki T. Cooperation of phosphate monomer and silica modification on zirconia. J Dent Res. 2008; 87:666–670.

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; 30:787–795.

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; 26:855–863.

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; 41:377–383.

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; 34:211–216.