J Adv Prosthodont.  2016 Aug;8(4):259-266. 10.4047/jap.2016.8.4.259.

Effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to CAD/CAM resin-ceramic hybrid materials

• Güngör M
• Nemli SK
• Bal BT
• Ãœnver S
• DoÄŸan A

• KMID: 2349333
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.4.259

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to thermocycled and non-thermocycled CAD/CAM resin-ceramic hybrid materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
120 specimens (10×10×2 mm) from each material were divided into 12 groups according to different surface treatments in combination with thermal aging procedures. Surface treatment methods were airborne-particle abrasion (abraded with 50 micron alumina particles), dry grinding (grinded with 125 µm grain size bur), and hydrofluoric acid (9%) and silane application. According to the thermocycling procedure, the groups were assigned as non-thermocycled, thermocycled after packing composites, and thermocycled before packing composites. The average surface roughness of the non-thermocycled specimens were measured after surface treatments. After packing composites and thermocycling procedures, shear bond strength (SBS) of the specimens were tested. The results of surface roughness were statistically analyzed by 2-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and SBS results were statistically analyzed by 3-way ANOVA.
RESULTS
Surface roughness of GC were significantly lower than that of LU and VE (P<.05). The highest surface roughness was observed for dry grinding group, followed by airborne particle abraded group (P<.05). Comparing the materials within the same surface treatment method revealed that untreated surfaces generally showed lower SBS values. The values of untreated LU specimens showed significantly different SBS values compared to those of other surface treatment groups (P<.05).
CONCLUSION
SBS was affected by surface treatments. Thermocycling did not have any effect on the SBS of the materials except acid and silane applied GC specimens, which were subjected to thermocycling before packing of the composite resin.

Keyword

Surface treatment; Shear bond strength; Resin ceramic hybrids

MeSH Terms

Aging
Aluminum Oxide
Hydrofluoric Acid
Methods
Aluminum Oxide
Hydrofluoric Acid

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of experimental groups.

• 

  Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of shear bond strength test.

Reference

1. Villarroel M, Fahl N, De Sousa AM, De Oliveira OB Jr. Direct esthetic restorations based on translucency and opacity of composite resins. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2011; 23:73–87.

2. Alshehri SA. An investigation into the role of core porcelain thickness and lamination in determining the flexural strength of In-Ceram dental materials. J Prosthodont. 2011; 20:261–266.

3. Tinschert J, Zwez D, Marx R, Anusavice KJ. Structural reliability of alumina-, feldspar-, leucite-, mica- and zirconia-based ceramics. J Dent. 2000; 28:529–535.

4. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J. 2008; 204:505–511.

5. Coldea A, Swain MV, Thiel N. Mechanical properties of polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network materials. Dent Mater. 2013; 29:419–426.

6. Schlichting LH, Maia HP, Baratieri LN, Magne P. Novel-design ultra-thin CAD/CAM composite resin and ceramic occlusal veneers for the treatment of severe dental erosion. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:217–226.

7. Frankenberger R, Hartmann VE, Krech M, Krämer N, Reich S, Braun A, Roggendorf M. Adhesive luting of new CAD/CAM materials. Int J Comput Dent. 2015; 18:9–20.

8. Koller M, Arnetzl GV, Holly L, Arnetzl G. Lava ultimate resin nano ceramic for CAD/CAM: customization case study. Int J Comput Dent. 2012; 15:159–164.

9. Awada A, Nathanson D. Mechanical properties of resin-ceramic CAD/CAM restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:587–593.

10. Bottino MA, Campos F, Ramos NC, Rippe MP, Valandro LF, Melo RM. Inlays made from a hybrid material: adaptation and bond strengths. Oper Dent. 2015; 40:E83–E91.

11. Raposo LH, Neiva NA, da Silva GR, Carlo HL, da Mota AS, do Prado CJ, Soares CJ. Ceramic restoration repair: report of two cases. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009; 17:140–144.

12. Kupiec KA, Wuertz KM, Barkmeier WW, Wilwerding TM. Evaluation of porcelain surface treatments and agents for composite-to-porcelain repair. J Prosthet Dent. 1996; 76:119–124.

13. Elsaka SE. Repair bond strength of resin composite to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic using different repair systems. Dent Mater J. 2015; 34:161–167.

14. 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.

15. Kim BK, Bae HE, Shim JS, Lee KW. The influence of ceramic surface treatments on the tensile bond strength of composite resin to all-ceramic coping materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94:357–362.

16. Roggendorf MJ, Kunzi B, Ebert J, Roggendorf HC, Frankenberger R, Reich SM. Seven-year clinical performance of CEREC-2 all-ceramic CAD/CAM restorations placed within deeply destroyed teeth. Clin Oral Investig. 2012; 16:1413–1424.

17. Sjögren 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.

18. Neis CA, Albuquerque NL, Albuquerque Ide S, Gomes EA, Souza-Filho CB, Feitosa VP, Spazzin AO, Bacchi A. Surface treatments for repair of feldspathic, leucite - and lithium disilicate-reinforced glass ceramics using composite resin. Braz Dent J. 2015; 26:152–155.

19. Attia A. Influence of surface treatment and cyclic loading on the durability of repaired all-ceramic crowns. J Appl Oral Sci. 2010; 18:194–200.

20. Gourav R, Ariga P, Jain AR, Philip JM. Effect of four different surface treatments on shear bond strength of three porcelain repair systems: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2013; 16:208–212.

21. Colares RC, Neri JR, Souza AM, Pontes KM, Mendonça JS, Santiago SL. Effect of surface pretreatments on the microtensile bond strength of lithium-disilicate ceramic repaired with composite resin. Braz Dent J. 2013; 24:349–352.

22. Matinlinna JP, Vallittu PK. Bonding of resin composites to etchable ceramic surfaces - an insight review of the chemical aspects on surface conditioning. J Oral Rehabil. 2007; 34:622–630.

23. Ozcan M, Valandro LF, Amaral R, Leite F, Bottino MA. Bond strength durability of a resin composite on a reinforced ceramic using various repair systems. Dent Mater. 2009; 25:1477–1483.

24. Blum IR, Nikolinakos N, Lynch CD, Wilson NH, Millar BJ, Jagger DC. An in vitro comparison of four intra-oral ceramic repair systems. J Dent. 2012; 40:906–912.

25. Kocaağaoğlu HH, Gürbulak A. An assessment of shear bond strength between ceramic repair systems and different ceramic infrastructures. Scanning. 2015; 37:300–305.

26. de Melo RM, Valandro LF, Bottino MA. Microtensile bond strength of a repair composite to leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic. Braz Dent J. 2007; 18:314–319.

27. 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.

28. Wiegand A, Stucki L, Hoffmann R, Attin T, Stawarczyk B. Repairability of CAD/CAM high-density PMMA- and composite-based polymers. Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19:2007–2013.

29. Elsaka SE. Influence of surface treatments on bond strength of metal and ceramic brackets to a novel CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic material. Odontology. 2016; 104:68–76.

30. Awad D, Stawarczyk B, Liebermann A, Ilie N. Translucency of esthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials and composite resins with respect to thickness and surface roughness. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 113:534–540.

31. Elsaka SE. Bond strength of novel CAD/CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments. J Adhes Dent. 2014; 16:531–540.

32. Hu M, Weiger R, Fischer J. Comparison of two test designs for evaluating the shear bond strength of resin composite cements. Dent Mater. 2016; 32:223–232.

33. Otani A, Amaral M, May LG, Cesar PF, Valandro LF. A critical evaluation of bond strength tests for the assessment of bonding to Y-TZP. Dent Mater. 2015; 31:648–656.

34. Heintze SD. Crown pull-off test (crown retention test) to evaluate the bonding effectiveness of luting agents. Dent Mater. 2010; 26:193–206.

35. Magni E, Ferrari M, Papacchini F, Hickel R, Ilie N. Influence of ozone on the composite-to-composite bond. Clin Oral Investig. 2011; 15:249–256.

36. Versluis A, Tantbirojn D, Douglas WH. Why do shear bond tests pull out dentin? J Dent Res. 1997; 76:1298–1307.

37. Lutz F, Krejci I, Barbakow F. Quality and durability of marginal adaptation in bonded composite restorations. Dent Mater. 1991; 7:107–113.

38. Heintze SD, Zimmerli B. Relevance of in vitro tests of adhesive and composite dental materials. A review in 3 parts. Part 3: in vitro tests of adhesive systems. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2011; 121:1024–1040.

39. Hatta M, Shinya A, Yokoyama D, Gomi H, Vallittu PK, Shinya A. The effect of surface treatment on bond strength of layering porcelain and hybrid composite bonded to zirconium dioxide ceramics. J Prosthodont Res. 2011; 55:146–153.

40. Lee JJ, Kang CK, Oh JW, Seo JM, Park JM. Evaluation of shear bond strength between dual cure resin cement and zirconia ceramic after thermocycling treatment. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7:1–7.

41. Kim GH, Park SW, Lee K, Oh GJ, Lim HP. Shear bond strength between resin cement and colored zirconia made with metal chlorides. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 113:603–608.

42. Shahdad SA, Kennedy JG. Bond strength of repaired anterior composite resins: an in vitro study. J Dent. 1998; 26:685–694.

43. Baur V, Ilie N. Repair of dental resin-based composites. Clin Oral Investig. 2013; 17:601–608.

44. Amaral FL, Colucci V, Palma-Dibb RG, Corona SA. Assessment of in vitro methods used to promote adhesive interface degradation: a critical review. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2007; 19:340–353.

45. Xie C, Han Y, Zhao XY, Wang ZY, He HM. Microtensile bond strength of one- and two-step self-etching adhesives on sclerotic dentin: the effects of thermocycling. Oper Dent. 2010; 35:547–555.

46. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent. 1999; 27:89–99.

47. Özel Bektas Ö, Eren D, Herguner Siso S, Akin GE. Effect of thermocycling on the bond strength of composite resin to bur and laser treated composite resin. Lasers Med Sci. 2012; 27:723–728.

48. Celik C, Cehreli SB, Arhun N. Resin composite repair: Quantitative microleakage evaluation of resin-resin and resin-tooth interfaces with different surface treatments. Eur J Dent. 2015; 9:92–99.

49. Gregory WA, Moss SM. Effects of heterogeneous layers of composite and time on composite repair of porcelain. Oper Dent. 1990; 15:18–22.