Malin Janson, Nicolai Geebelen, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier, Anja Liebermann
{"title":"不同通用胶粘剂对不同CAD/CAM硅酸盐陶瓷复合修复中剪切强度影响的体外研究","authors":"Malin Janson, Nicolai Geebelen, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier, Anja Liebermann","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the influence of various universal adhesives (UA's) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of composite repairs to different CAD/CAM-fabricated silicate ceramics and compared silane-containing versus non-silane-containing UA's.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>270 rectangular specimens from three CAD/CAM ceramics types CTS (Cerec Tessera HT), IEC (IPS Empress CAD LT), and IXC (IPS e.max CAD LT) were bonded with composite resin (Ceram.x Spectra ST Flow) using UA's: PBA (Prime&Bond Active), CUB (Clearfil Universal Bond Quick), MBP (Monobond Plus), SBU (Scotchbond Universal), IBU (iBond Universal) and SBP (Scotchbond Universal Plus). Before SBS testing (MPa) specimens were thermally aged in distilled water (7 days, 37°C; 5000 cycles 5-55°C). Representative SEM images were analyzed for failure modes. Data were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn's correction (α < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant SBS differences were observed across ceramics and UA's. IEC showed the highest SBS values, particularly with CUB (27.09 ± 3.75 MPa) and MBP (24.61 ± 6.36 MPa). Lowest values occurred with IXC + IBU (2.64 ± 3.74 MPa), CTS + SBP (2.05 ± 2.57 MPa), IXC + SBU (0.73 ± 0.56 MPa), and CTS + SBU (0.24 ± 0.53 MPa). IEC differed significantly from CTS and IXC (p < 0.001). Cohesive failures predominated in IEC, whereas IXC and CTS exhibited adhesive failures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UA type, ceramic, and microstructure significantly impact SBS in composite repairs. The selection of UA should be adapted to the type of silicate ceramic to be repaired. In this study, the UA CUB yielded the best results across all ceramic types.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Different Universal Adhesives on Shear Bond Strength in Composite Repairs to Different CAD/CAM Silicate Ceramics - An In Vitro Study.\",\"authors\":\"Malin Janson, Nicolai Geebelen, Christoph Matthias Schoppmeier, Anja Liebermann\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/ijp.9507\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the influence of various universal adhesives (UA's) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of composite repairs to different CAD/CAM-fabricated silicate ceramics and compared silane-containing versus non-silane-containing UA's.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>270 rectangular specimens from three CAD/CAM ceramics types CTS (Cerec Tessera HT), IEC (IPS Empress CAD LT), and IXC (IPS e.max CAD LT) were bonded with composite resin (Ceram.x Spectra ST Flow) using UA's: PBA (Prime&Bond Active), CUB (Clearfil Universal Bond Quick), MBP (Monobond Plus), SBU (Scotchbond Universal), IBU (iBond Universal) and SBP (Scotchbond Universal Plus). Before SBS testing (MPa) specimens were thermally aged in distilled water (7 days, 37°C; 5000 cycles 5-55°C). Representative SEM images were analyzed for failure modes. Data were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn's correction (α < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant SBS differences were observed across ceramics and UA's. IEC showed the highest SBS values, particularly with CUB (27.09 ± 3.75 MPa) and MBP (24.61 ± 6.36 MPa). Lowest values occurred with IXC + IBU (2.64 ± 3.74 MPa), CTS + SBP (2.05 ± 2.57 MPa), IXC + SBU (0.73 ± 0.56 MPa), and CTS + SBU (0.24 ± 0.53 MPa). IEC differed significantly from CTS and IXC (p < 0.001). Cohesive failures predominated in IEC, whereas IXC and CTS exhibited adhesive failures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UA type, ceramic, and microstructure significantly impact SBS in composite repairs. The selection of UA should be adapted to the type of silicate ceramic to be repaired. In this study, the UA CUB yielded the best results across all ceramic types.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"0 0\",\"pages\":\"1-22\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"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.9507\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of Different Universal Adhesives on Shear Bond Strength in Composite Repairs to Different CAD/CAM Silicate Ceramics - An In Vitro Study.
Purpose: This study evaluated the influence of various universal adhesives (UA's) on the shear bond strength (SBS) of composite repairs to different CAD/CAM-fabricated silicate ceramics and compared silane-containing versus non-silane-containing UA's.
Material and methods: 270 rectangular specimens from three CAD/CAM ceramics types CTS (Cerec Tessera HT), IEC (IPS Empress CAD LT), and IXC (IPS e.max CAD LT) were bonded with composite resin (Ceram.x Spectra ST Flow) using UA's: PBA (Prime&Bond Active), CUB (Clearfil Universal Bond Quick), MBP (Monobond Plus), SBU (Scotchbond Universal), IBU (iBond Universal) and SBP (Scotchbond Universal Plus). Before SBS testing (MPa) specimens were thermally aged in distilled water (7 days, 37°C; 5000 cycles 5-55°C). Representative SEM images were analyzed for failure modes. Data were evaluated using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn's correction (α < 0.05).
Results: Significant SBS differences were observed across ceramics and UA's. IEC showed the highest SBS values, particularly with CUB (27.09 ± 3.75 MPa) and MBP (24.61 ± 6.36 MPa). Lowest values occurred with IXC + IBU (2.64 ± 3.74 MPa), CTS + SBP (2.05 ± 2.57 MPa), IXC + SBU (0.73 ± 0.56 MPa), and CTS + SBU (0.24 ± 0.53 MPa). IEC differed significantly from CTS and IXC (p < 0.001). Cohesive failures predominated in IEC, whereas IXC and CTS exhibited adhesive failures.
Conclusions: UA type, ceramic, and microstructure significantly impact SBS in composite repairs. The selection of UA should be adapted to the type of silicate ceramic to be repaired. In this study, the UA CUB yielded the best results across all ceramic types.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
