J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2018 Oct;56(4):269-277. 10.4047/jkap.2018.56.4.269.

Effect of glass-infiltration treatments on the shear bond strength between zirconia and ultra low-fusing porcelain veneer

• Yim EK
• Park SW

• KMID: 2424026
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2018.56.4.269

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study examined the effects of glass infiltration treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) between zirconia core and ultra low-fusing porcelain veneer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The zirconia specimens were classified into 4 groups (n = 12): Untreated zirconia (group Z), zirconia coated ZirLiner (group ZL), glass-infiltrated zirconia (group ZG), glass-infiltrated and sandblasted zirconia (group ZGS). A cylinder of ultra low-fusing veneer porcelain was build up on each disk (6 mm × 3 mm). SBS was measured using a universal testing machine. Scanning electron microscope and Energy Dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to evaluate the surface of zirconia and failure pattern after SBS.
RESULTS
SBS value of group ZGS was significantly lower than that of other groups (P < .05). No significant differences were detected among group ZL, group Z and group ZG.
CONCLUSION
Glass infiltration is not effective to the bond strength between zirconia and ultra low-fusing porcelain veneer. Sandblasting also dramatically decreased the bonding strength.

Keyword

Glass infiltrated zirconia; Ultra low-fusing porcelain; Sandblasting; Shear bond strength; Failure pattern

MeSH Terms

Dental Porcelain*
Glass
Spectrometry, X-Ray Emission
Dental Porcelain

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Representative SEM image of different surface treatment on zirconia specimen (× 500). (A) Group Z, (B) Group ZL, (C) Group ZG, (D) Group ZGS.

• 

  Fig. 2 EDX of different surface treatment on zirconia specimen. (A) Group Z, (B) Group ZL, (C) Group ZG, (D) Group ZGS.

• 

  Fig. 3 Representative SEM image of interface between zirconia and veneering porcelain (× 20,000). (A) Group Z, (B) Group ZL, (C) Group ZG, (D) Group ZGS.

• 

  Fig. 4 Mean and standard deviation of Shear bond strength (* significant at P < .05).

• 

  Fig. 5 Representative SEM images of fractured zirconia specimen. (A) Group Z, (B) Group ZL, (C) Group ZG, (D) Group ZGS (× 25).

Reference

1. Bindl A, Lüthy H, Mörmann WH. Thin-wall ceramic CAD/CAM crown copings: strength and fracture pattern. J Oral Rehabil. 2006; 33:520–528.

2. Guazzato M, Albakry M, Ringer SP, Swain MV. Strength, fracture toughness and microstructure of a selection of all-ceramic materials. Part II Zirconia-based dental ceramics. Dent Mater. 2004; 20:449–456.

3. Albakry M, Guazzato M, Swain MV. Fracture toughness and hardness evaluation of three pressable all-ceramic dental materials. J Dent. 2003; 31:181–188.

4. Luthardt RG, Holzhüter M, Sandkuhl O, Herold V, Schnapp JD, Kuhlisch E, Walter M. Reliability and properties of ground Y-TZP-zirconia ceramics. J Dent Res. 2002; 81:487–491.

5. Meyenberg KH, Lüthy H, Schärer P. Zirconia posts: a new all-ceramic concept for nonvital abutment teeth. J Esthet Dent. 1995; 7:73–80.

6. Della Bona A, Kelly JR. The clinical success of all-ceramic restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008; 139:Suppl. 8S–13S.

7. Braga RR, Ballester RY, Daronch M. Influence of time and adhesive system on the extrusion shear strength between feldspathic porcelain and bovine dentin. Dent Mater. 2000; 16:303–310.

8. De Jager N, Pallav P, Feilzer AJ. The influence of design parameters on the FEA-determined stress distribution in CAD-CAM produced all-ceramic dental crowns. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:242–251.

9. Hämmerle CH. Success and failure of fixed bridgework. Periodontol 2000. 1994; 4:41–51.

10. Heintze SD, Rousson V. Survival of zirconia- and metal-supported fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review. Int J Prosthodont. 2010; 23:493–502.

11. Kirmali O, Akin H, Ozdemir AK. Shear bond strength of veneering ceramic to zirconia core after different surface treatments. Photomed Laser Surg. 2013; 31:261–268.

12. Peterson IM, Pajares A, Lawn BR, Thompson VP, Rekow ED. Mechanical characterization of dental ceramics by hertzian contacts. J Dent Res. 1998; 77:589–602.

13. Aboushelib MN, de Jager N, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Microtensile bond strength of different components of core veneered all-ceramic restorations. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:984–991.

14. Fischer J, Stawarczyk B, Sailer I, Hämmerle CH. Shear bond strength between veneering ceramics and ceria-stabilized zirconia/alumina. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 103:267–274.

15. Kim JW, Bhowmick S, Hermann I, Lawn BR. Transverse fracture of brittle bilayers: relevance to failure of all-ceramic dental crowns. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2006; 79:58–65.

16. Yoon HI, Yeo IS, Yi YJ, Kim SH, Lee JB, Han JS. Effect of surface treatment and liner material on the adhesion between veneering ceramic and zirconia. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014; 40:369–374.

17. Zhang Y. Overview: Damage resistance of graded ceramic restorative materials. J Eur Ceram Soc. 2012; 32:2623–2632.

18. Zhang Y, Kim JW. Graded structures for damage resistant and aesthetic all-ceramic restorations. Dent Mater. 2009; 25:781–790.

19. Fischer J, Grohmann P, Stawarczyk B. Effect of zirconia surface treatments on the shear strength of zirconia/veneering ceramic composites. Dent Mater J. 2008; 27:448–454.

20. Fischer J, Stawarczyk B, Sailer I, Hämmerle CH. Shear bond strength between veneering ceramics and ceria-stabilized zirconia/alumina. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 103:267–274.

21. Isgrò G, Pallav P, van der Zel JM, Feilzer AJ. The influence of the veneering porcelain and different surface treatments on the biaxial flexural strength of a heat-pressed ceramic. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90:465–473.

22. Scherrer SS, Kelly JR, Quinn GD, Xu K. Fracture toughness (KIc) of a dental porcelain determined by fractographic analysis. Dent Mater. 1999; 15:342–348.

23. Aboushelib MN, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Microtensile bond strength of different components of core veneered all-ceramic restorations. Part II: Zirconia veneering ceramics. Dent Mater. 2006; 22:857–863.

24. Sundh A, Molin M, Sjögren G. Fracture resistance of yttrium oxide partially-stabilized zirconia all-ceramic bridges after veneering and mechanical fatigue testing. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:476–482.

25. Zhang Y, Kim JW. Graded zirconia glass for resistance to veneer fracture. J Dent Res. 2010; 89:1057–1062.

26. Liu R, Sun T, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Jiang D, Shao L. The effect of graded glass-zirconia structure on the bond between core and veneer in layered zirconia restorations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015; 46:197–204.

27. Wattanasirmkit K, Srimaneepong V, Kanchanatawewat K, Monmaturapoj N, Thunyakitpisal P, Jinawath S. Improving shear bond strength between feldspathic porcelain and zirconia substructure with lithium disilicate glass-ceramic liner. Dent Mater J. 2015; 34:302–309.

28. Vagkopoulou T, Koutayas SO, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry: Part 1. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2009; 4:130–151.

29. Porter DL, Heuer AH. Mechanisms of Toughening Partially Stabilized Zirconia (PSZ). J Am Ceram Soc. 1977; 60:183–184.

30. Craig RG. Mechanical properties in restorative dental materials. 11th ed. New York: Mosby;2002. p. 551–592.

31. Guess PC, Kulis A, Witkowski S, Wolkewitz M, Zhang Y, Strub JR. Shear bond strengths between different zirconia cores and veneering ceramics and their susceptibility to thermocycling. Dent Mater. 2008; 24:1556–1567.

32. Diniz AC, Nascimento RM, Souza JC, Henriques BB, Carreiro AF. Fracture and shear bond strength analyses of different dental veneering ceramics to zirconia. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014; 38:79–84.

33. Choi BK, Han JS, Yang JH, Lee JB, Kim SH. Shear bond strength of veneering porcelain to zirconia and metal cores. J Adv Prosthodont. 2009; 1:129–135.