{"title":"Effect of adhesives and mechanical surface treatments on the hard relining of CAD-CAM denture bases.","authors":"Isil Karaokutan, Ilayda Ayvaz, Gulsum Sayin Ozel","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of mechanical roughening, adhesive applications, and aging on the bonding between CAD-CAM denture base materials with distinct chemical contents and hard relining material.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 300 denture base specimens were produced by additive, subtractive, and conventional heat-polymerization techniques (N = 100). The specimens have been classified into five subgroups based on the particular surface treatments administered (n = 20): (1) Hard relining material's adhesive application (control); (2) Tungsten carbide bur application for 1 min, and hard reline material's adhesive application; (3) Airborne-particle abrasion (APA) with 110 μm Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>, and hard reline material's adhesive application; (4) Scotchbond Universal application; and (5) Visio.link application. Representative specimens from each subgroup were examined under a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Subsequently, self-cure hard relining material was condensed in the center of the specimens. Half of the specimens were thermally aged with 5000 cycles at 5°C-55°C. The shear bond strength (SBS) test was performed, and failure loads were recorded. The data was evaluated by Robust ANOVA and Bonferroni test (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant difference was obtained between the production techniques (p = 0.051). The lowest SBS was observed in the control group among surface treatments, while mechanical surface treatments and universal adhesive showed the highest SBS for both aged and non-aged groups. Aging caused a significant decrease for all test groups (p = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mechanical surface treatments and universal adhesive applications are more effective for maintaining adhesion across all production techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13934","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of mechanical roughening, adhesive applications, and aging on the bonding between CAD-CAM denture base materials with distinct chemical contents and hard relining material.
Materials and methods: A total of 300 denture base specimens were produced by additive, subtractive, and conventional heat-polymerization techniques (N = 100). The specimens have been classified into five subgroups based on the particular surface treatments administered (n = 20): (1) Hard relining material's adhesive application (control); (2) Tungsten carbide bur application for 1 min, and hard reline material's adhesive application; (3) Airborne-particle abrasion (APA) with 110 μm Al2O3, and hard reline material's adhesive application; (4) Scotchbond Universal application; and (5) Visio.link application. Representative specimens from each subgroup were examined under a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Subsequently, self-cure hard relining material was condensed in the center of the specimens. Half of the specimens were thermally aged with 5000 cycles at 5°C-55°C. The shear bond strength (SBS) test was performed, and failure loads were recorded. The data was evaluated by Robust ANOVA and Bonferroni test (p < 0.05).
Results: No statistically significant difference was obtained between the production techniques (p = 0.051). The lowest SBS was observed in the control group among surface treatments, while mechanical surface treatments and universal adhesive showed the highest SBS for both aged and non-aged groups. Aging caused a significant decrease for all test groups (p = 0.001).
Conclusions: Mechanical surface treatments and universal adhesive applications are more effective for maintaining adhesion across all production techniques.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.