各种粘结剂与固定义齿修复材料的剪切粘结强度

IF 1.68 Q2 Dentistry
Simel Ayyildiz, Faruk Emir, Elif Pak Tunc, Deniz Sen
{"title":"各种粘结剂与固定义齿修复材料的剪切粘结强度","authors":"Simel Ayyildiz,&nbsp;Faruk Emir,&nbsp;Elif Pak Tunc,&nbsp;Deniz Sen","doi":"10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different cements to zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic surface after thermal cycling. Thirty zirconia (Z) and thirty lithium disilicate (L) disk specimens were prepared in 8?mm in diameter and 3.4?mm in thickness from zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic blocks. Each group was divided into three subgroups (n:10). The specimens from all groups were bonded with three different cements using transparent polyethylene tubes: Zn-Phosphate cement (ZPC); self-adhesive resin cement (SARC); adhesive resin cement (ARS). The specimens were then subjected to thermal aging procedure for 1?week under 37?°C water bath. Shear bond strength (SBS) was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1?mm/min. The specimens were also examined both with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA. Pair-wise statistical comparison was made with Tukey test. The overall significance level was set at α?=?0.05. For the tested groups, the SBS values ranged from 0.29?±?0.03 to 12.10?±?0.25?MPa. L-SARC group yielded the highest SBS value (p?&lt;?0.05) among the groups, while Z-ZPC group had the lowest (p?&lt;?0.05). Significantly higher SBS values were found for all the groups of lithium disilicate disk specimens (L) when compared to those of zirconia disk specimens (Z) (p?&lt;?0.05). Tukey’s pairwise comparisons revealed that SBS values of SARC groups were significantly higher than those of the ARC and ZPC groups (p?&lt;?0.05). Mode of failure analysis results showed that, the modes of failures were mixed with adhesive debonding predominantly with minimal resin residues (&lt;10?%) for SARC groups. However, the other groups showed adhesive failure predominantly. Within the limitation of this in vitro study, it was concluded that selfadhesive resin cement had the highest shear bond strength values when bonded to lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic surface. However zinc-phosphate cement demonstrated significantly lower shear bond strength values for both ceramic groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":464,"journal":{"name":"Applied Adhesion Science","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6800,"publicationDate":"2015-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shear bond strength of various luting cements to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials\",\"authors\":\"Simel Ayyildiz,&nbsp;Faruk Emir,&nbsp;Elif Pak Tunc,&nbsp;Deniz Sen\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different cements to zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic surface after thermal cycling. Thirty zirconia (Z) and thirty lithium disilicate (L) disk specimens were prepared in 8?mm in diameter and 3.4?mm in thickness from zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic blocks. Each group was divided into three subgroups (n:10). The specimens from all groups were bonded with three different cements using transparent polyethylene tubes: Zn-Phosphate cement (ZPC); self-adhesive resin cement (SARC); adhesive resin cement (ARS). The specimens were then subjected to thermal aging procedure for 1?week under 37?°C water bath. Shear bond strength (SBS) was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1?mm/min. The specimens were also examined both with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA. Pair-wise statistical comparison was made with Tukey test. The overall significance level was set at α?=?0.05. For the tested groups, the SBS values ranged from 0.29?±?0.03 to 12.10?±?0.25?MPa. L-SARC group yielded the highest SBS value (p?&lt;?0.05) among the groups, while Z-ZPC group had the lowest (p?&lt;?0.05). Significantly higher SBS values were found for all the groups of lithium disilicate disk specimens (L) when compared to those of zirconia disk specimens (Z) (p?&lt;?0.05). Tukey’s pairwise comparisons revealed that SBS values of SARC groups were significantly higher than those of the ARC and ZPC groups (p?&lt;?0.05). Mode of failure analysis results showed that, the modes of failures were mixed with adhesive debonding predominantly with minimal resin residues (&lt;10?%) for SARC groups. However, the other groups showed adhesive failure predominantly. Within the limitation of this in vitro study, it was concluded that selfadhesive resin cement had the highest shear bond strength values when bonded to lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic surface. However zinc-phosphate cement demonstrated significantly lower shear bond strength values for both ceramic groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Adhesion Science\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6800,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Adhesion Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Adhesion Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40563-015-0039-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

本研究的目的是评价三种不同水泥在热循环后与氧化锆和二硅酸锂陶瓷表面的剪切结合强度(SBS)。制备了30个氧化锆(Z)圆盘和30个二硅酸锂(L)圆盘。直径为毫米和3.4?厚度为毫米的氧化锆和二硅酸锂陶瓷块。每组分为3个亚组(n:10)。所有组的标本均采用透明聚乙烯管与三种不同的水泥结合:磷酸锌水泥(ZPC);自粘树脂水泥;粘接树脂水泥(ARS)。然后对试样进行1?37岁以下一周?°C水浴。剪切粘接强度(SBS)采用万能试验机测定,十字头速度为1?mm/min。用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和体视显微镜对标本进行了检查。统计学分析采用单因素方差分析。采用Tukey检验进行两两统计比较。总体显著性水平设为α?=?0.05。被试组的SBS值为0.29±0.03 ~ 12.10±0.25 MPa。L-SARC组SBS值最高(p < 0.05), Z-ZPC组最低(p < 0.05)。二硅酸锂圆盘标本(L)的SBS值均显著高于氧化锆圆盘标本(Z) (p <?0.05)。Tukey两两比较显示,SARC组的SBS值显著高于ARC和ZPC组(p <?0.05)。破坏模式分析结果表明,SARC组的破坏模式以粘结脱粘为主,树脂残留量最小(10%)。然而,其他组以粘接失败为主。在体外实验的限制下,自粘树脂水泥在与二硅酸锂和氧化锆陶瓷表面结合时具有最高的剪切强度值。然而,磷酸锌水泥在两种陶瓷组中表现出明显较低的剪切强度值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Shear bond strength of various luting cements to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials

Shear bond strength of various luting cements to fixed prosthodontic restorative materials

The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of three different cements to zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic surface after thermal cycling. Thirty zirconia (Z) and thirty lithium disilicate (L) disk specimens were prepared in 8?mm in diameter and 3.4?mm in thickness from zirconia and lithium disilicate ceramic blocks. Each group was divided into three subgroups (n:10). The specimens from all groups were bonded with three different cements using transparent polyethylene tubes: Zn-Phosphate cement (ZPC); self-adhesive resin cement (SARC); adhesive resin cement (ARS). The specimens were then subjected to thermal aging procedure for 1?week under 37?°C water bath. Shear bond strength (SBS) was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1?mm/min. The specimens were also examined both with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a stereomicroscope. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA. Pair-wise statistical comparison was made with Tukey test. The overall significance level was set at α?=?0.05. For the tested groups, the SBS values ranged from 0.29?±?0.03 to 12.10?±?0.25?MPa. L-SARC group yielded the highest SBS value (p?<?0.05) among the groups, while Z-ZPC group had the lowest (p?<?0.05). Significantly higher SBS values were found for all the groups of lithium disilicate disk specimens (L) when compared to those of zirconia disk specimens (Z) (p?<?0.05). Tukey’s pairwise comparisons revealed that SBS values of SARC groups were significantly higher than those of the ARC and ZPC groups (p?<?0.05). Mode of failure analysis results showed that, the modes of failures were mixed with adhesive debonding predominantly with minimal resin residues (<10?%) for SARC groups. However, the other groups showed adhesive failure predominantly. Within the limitation of this in vitro study, it was concluded that selfadhesive resin cement had the highest shear bond strength values when bonded to lithium disilicate and zirconia ceramic surface. However zinc-phosphate cement demonstrated significantly lower shear bond strength values for both ceramic groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Adhesion Science
Applied Adhesion Science Dentistry-Dentistry (miscellaneous)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Applied Adhesion Science focuses on practical applications of adhesives, with special emphasis in fields such as oil industry, aerospace and biomedicine. Topics related to the phenomena of adhesion and the application of adhesive materials are welcome, especially in biomedical areas such as adhesive dentistry. Both theoretical and experimental works are considered for publication. Applied Adhesion Science is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal''s open access policy offers a fast publication workflow whilst maintaining rigorous peer review process.
×
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