Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength at the interface of monolithic zirconia with two distinct core build-up materials: An in vitro study.

IF 1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Parmar Aditi, Sonal Mehta, Ruchi Raj
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength at the interface of monolithic zirconia with two distinct core build-up materials: An <i>in vitro</i> study.","authors":"Parmar Aditi, Sonal Mehta, Ruchi Raj","doi":"10.4103/jips.jips_1_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The study aimed to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) at the interface of monolithic zirconia with zirconomer (Zr) core build-up, a new type of glass ionomer cement to monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up material.</p><p><strong>Setting and design: </strong>In vitro a comparative study.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 32 disk-shaped samples of monolithic zirconia and two distinct core build-up materials: Zr (n = 16) and composite resin (n = 16) were used. The two components, monolithic zirconia with Zr core build-up and monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up, were bonded using zirconia primer and self-adhesive, dual-cure cement. The samples were subsequently thermocycled, and the SBS was tested at their interfaces. The failure modes were determined using a stereomicroscope. Data were evaluated using the descriptive analysis for mean, standard deviation, confidence interval, and independent t-test for intergroup comparison.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis used: </strong>Descriptive analysis, independent t-test, Chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean SBS (megapascals) of monolithic zirconia to Zr core build-up (0.74) was statistically significant when compared to monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up material (7.25) (P ≤ 0.001). Zirconomer core build-up showed 100% adhesive failure; composite resin core build-up had 43.8% cohesive, 31.2% mixed, and 25.0% adhesive failures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When evaluating the two core build-up materials' bindings to monolithic zirconia, Zr and composite resin core build-up showed statistically significant differences. Although Zr has been demonstrated to be the optimal core build-up material; however, additional investigation is required to determine how it bonds to monolithic zirconia more effectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":22669,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","volume":"23 2","pages":"178-183"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10262097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_1_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) at the interface of monolithic zirconia with zirconomer (Zr) core build-up, a new type of glass ionomer cement to monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up material.

Setting and design: In vitro a comparative study.

Materials and methods: A total of 32 disk-shaped samples of monolithic zirconia and two distinct core build-up materials: Zr (n = 16) and composite resin (n = 16) were used. The two components, monolithic zirconia with Zr core build-up and monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up, were bonded using zirconia primer and self-adhesive, dual-cure cement. The samples were subsequently thermocycled, and the SBS was tested at their interfaces. The failure modes were determined using a stereomicroscope. Data were evaluated using the descriptive analysis for mean, standard deviation, confidence interval, and independent t-test for intergroup comparison.

Statistical analysis used: Descriptive analysis, independent t-test, Chi-square test.

Results: The mean SBS (megapascals) of monolithic zirconia to Zr core build-up (0.74) was statistically significant when compared to monolithic zirconia with composite resin core build-up material (7.25) (P ≤ 0.001). Zirconomer core build-up showed 100% adhesive failure; composite resin core build-up had 43.8% cohesive, 31.2% mixed, and 25.0% adhesive failures.

Conclusion: When evaluating the two core build-up materials' bindings to monolithic zirconia, Zr and composite resin core build-up showed statistically significant differences. Although Zr has been demonstrated to be the optimal core build-up material; however, additional investigation is required to determine how it bonds to monolithic zirconia more effectively.

整体氧化锆与两种不同制芯材料界面剪切结合强度的比较评估:体外研究。
目的:该研究旨在评估和比较整体氧化锆与Zirconomer (Zr)核心构建材料(一种新型玻璃离子粘固剂)界面的剪切粘结强度(SBS),以及整体氧化锆与复合树脂核心构建材料界面的剪切粘结强度:材料与方法:体外对比研究:材料和方法:总共 32 个圆盘状的整体氧化锆样品和两种不同的核心增强材料:使用了氧化锆(16 个)和复合树脂(16 个)。使用氧化锆底漆和自粘性双固化水泥将两种材料粘合在一起,一种是带有锆核心增强材料的整体氧化锆,另一种是带有复合树脂核心增强材料的整体氧化锆。随后对样品进行热循环,并在其界面上测试 SBS。使用体视显微镜确定失效模式。对数据的评估采用了平均值、标准偏差、置信区间的描述性分析,以及用于组间比较的独立 t 检验:描述性分析、独立 t 检验、卡方检验:结果:单片氧化锆与 Zr 核心构建材料的平均 SBS(兆帕)(0.74)与单片氧化锆与复合树脂核心构建材料的平均 SBS(7.25)相比具有统计学意义(P ≤ 0.001)。氧化锆牙本质的粘接失败率为100%;复合树脂牙本质的内聚失败率为43.8%,混合失败率为31.2%,粘接失败率为25.0%:结论:在评估两种制芯材料与整体氧化锆的结合力时,锆和复合树脂制芯材料在统计学上有显著差异。虽然锆被证明是最佳的制芯材料,但还需要进一步研究,以确定它如何更有效地与整体氧化锆结合。
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
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
26
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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