Shear Bond Strength of Five Different Repair Systems to Three Different Ceramic Materials.

Martin Janda, Evaggelia Papia, Christel Larsson
{"title":"Shear Bond Strength of Five Different Repair Systems to Three Different Ceramic Materials.","authors":"Martin Janda, Evaggelia Papia, Christel Larsson","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the current study was to investigate the shear bond strength of composite resin in five different ceramic repair systems for three different ceramic materials.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>225 monolithic zirconia (Zr) and lithium disilicate (LDS) and cobalt chromium (CoCr) specimens with feldspathic porcelain (FP) veneer were fabricated (N=75 per material). The specimens underwent thermo-cycling and were randomly divided into five groups for the following intra-oral repair systems (n=15): 1) Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray Noritake, Japan; 2) Ibond Intraoral Repair Kit, Kulzer, Germany; 3) VOCO Cimara, VOCO GmbH Germany; 4) Ivoclar Vivadent, Ceramic Repair System Kit, IvoclarVivadent, Liechtenstein; 5) Ultradent Porcelain Repair Kit, Ultradent Products Inc, USA. After surface conditioning, composite was applied using a cylindrical mold and a second round of thermocycling was performed. Each specimen was then subjected to shear load until failure. Microshear bond strength was compared using analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA, Tukey's test, a <0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Type of porcelain repair kit significantly affected the shear bond strength. For Zr, the repair systems from Kulzer and VOCO had significantly higher shear bond strength than the other systems (p<0.001) without significant difference between Kulzer and VOCO. For the LDS and CoCr with FP, hydrofluoric acid had the highest shear bond strength (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For zirconia, a 10-Methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (10-MDP) system should be used. The results also suggest that a cleaning bur may be beneficial. For glass-based ceramics and feldspathic porcelain, etching with hydrofluoric acid remains the product of choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to investigate the shear bond strength of composite resin in five different ceramic repair systems for three different ceramic materials.

Materials and methods: 225 monolithic zirconia (Zr) and lithium disilicate (LDS) and cobalt chromium (CoCr) specimens with feldspathic porcelain (FP) veneer were fabricated (N=75 per material). The specimens underwent thermo-cycling and were randomly divided into five groups for the following intra-oral repair systems (n=15): 1) Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray Noritake, Japan; 2) Ibond Intraoral Repair Kit, Kulzer, Germany; 3) VOCO Cimara, VOCO GmbH Germany; 4) Ivoclar Vivadent, Ceramic Repair System Kit, IvoclarVivadent, Liechtenstein; 5) Ultradent Porcelain Repair Kit, Ultradent Products Inc, USA. After surface conditioning, composite was applied using a cylindrical mold and a second round of thermocycling was performed. Each specimen was then subjected to shear load until failure. Microshear bond strength was compared using analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA, Tukey's test, a <0.05).

Results: Type of porcelain repair kit significantly affected the shear bond strength. For Zr, the repair systems from Kulzer and VOCO had significantly higher shear bond strength than the other systems (p<0.001) without significant difference between Kulzer and VOCO. For the LDS and CoCr with FP, hydrofluoric acid had the highest shear bond strength (p<0.001).

Conclusion: For zirconia, a 10-Methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (10-MDP) system should be used. The results also suggest that a cleaning bur may be beneficial. For glass-based ceramics and feldspathic porcelain, etching with hydrofluoric acid remains the product of choice.

五种不同修补系统与三种不同陶瓷材料的剪切粘接强度
材料和方法:制作了 225 个带有长石瓷(FP)贴面的氧化锆(Zr)、二硅酸锂(LDS)和钴铬(CoCr)单片试样(每种材料 N=75)。试样经过热循环处理后随机分为五组,分别用于以下口内修复系统(n=15):1) Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus,Kuraray Noritake,日本;2) Ibond Intraoral Repair Kit,Kulzer,德国;3) VOCO Cimara,VOCO GmbH,德国;4) Ivoclar Vivadent,Ceramic Repair System Kit,IvoclarVivadent,列支敦士登;5) Ultradent Porcelain Repair Kit,Ultradent Products Inc,美国。表面调理后,使用圆柱形模具涂上复合材料,并进行第二轮热循环。然后对每个试样施加剪切载荷直至破坏。采用方差分析(单因素方差分析、Tukey's 检验、a 结果)比较微剪切粘接强度:瓷修复套件的类型对剪切粘接强度有很大影响。对于氧化锆,Kulzer 和 VOCO 修复系统的剪切粘接强度明显高于其他系统(p 结论:对于氧化锆,应使用 10-甲基丙烯酰氧癸基磷酸二氢酯(10-MDP)系统。结果还表明,使用清洁毛刺可能会有好处。对于玻璃基陶瓷和长石瓷,使用氢氟酸进行蚀刻仍然是首选产品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信