不同表面蚀刻方法处理CAD/CAM修复材料的粘结强度。

L. Colombo, F. Murillo-Gómez, M. D. De Goes
{"title":"不同表面蚀刻方法处理CAD/CAM修复材料的粘结强度。","authors":"L. Colombo, F. Murillo-Gómez, M. D. De Goes","doi":"10.3290/j.jad.a42931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the surface morphology of CAD/CAM ceramics and on their bond strength to cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty cubic sections were cut from each of three materials (lithium disilicate glass-ceramic [DL], leucite-based glass-ceramic [LC], resin-matrix ceramic composite [RMCC]) and were treated as follows (n = 10): 1. no treatment (C); 2. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF5% 20 s); 3. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF5% 60 s); 4. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF10% 20 s); 5. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF10% 60 s); 6. Self-etching ceramic primer (MBEP). Ceramic cubes were bonded to pre-polymerized composite resin cubes with a composite cement. Each set was cut into stick-shaped specimens (1 ± 0.3 mm2). After 24-h water storage, microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was measured. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Failure pattern and surface morphology were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS Both factors significantly influenced µTBS, while no interaction between factors was found. RMCC presented statistically higher µTBS values than LC and DL, while the surface treatments HF5% 20 s, HF5% 60 s, HF10% 20 s, HF10% 60 s and MBEP, did not show statistical differences between them, although they resulted in statistically significantly higher bond strengths than did C groups. A high number of pre-test failures were detected in the control groups for all materials. MBEP produced less extensive surface alterations than did all HF treatments. CONCLUSION All of the hydrofluoric acid treatments tested showed similar cement-ceramic bonding efficacy. The self-etching ceramic primer produced less surface alterations and comparable bonding efficacy compared to separate hydrofluoric acid/silane primer application.","PeriodicalId":94234,"journal":{"name":"The journal of adhesive dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Restorative Materials Treated with Different Surface Etching Protocols.\",\"authors\":\"L. Colombo, F. Murillo-Gómez, M. D. De Goes\",\"doi\":\"10.3290/j.jad.a42931\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the surface morphology of CAD/CAM ceramics and on their bond strength to cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty cubic sections were cut from each of three materials (lithium disilicate glass-ceramic [DL], leucite-based glass-ceramic [LC], resin-matrix ceramic composite [RMCC]) and were treated as follows (n = 10): 1. no treatment (C); 2. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF5% 20 s); 3. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF5% 60 s); 4. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF10% 20 s); 5. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF10% 60 s); 6. Self-etching ceramic primer (MBEP). Ceramic cubes were bonded to pre-polymerized composite resin cubes with a composite cement. Each set was cut into stick-shaped specimens (1 ± 0.3 mm2). After 24-h water storage, microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was measured. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Failure pattern and surface morphology were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS Both factors significantly influenced µTBS, while no interaction between factors was found. RMCC presented statistically higher µTBS values than LC and DL, while the surface treatments HF5% 20 s, HF5% 60 s, HF10% 20 s, HF10% 60 s and MBEP, did not show statistical differences between them, although they resulted in statistically significantly higher bond strengths than did C groups. A high number of pre-test failures were detected in the control groups for all materials. MBEP produced less extensive surface alterations than did all HF treatments. CONCLUSION All of the hydrofluoric acid treatments tested showed similar cement-ceramic bonding efficacy. The self-etching ceramic primer produced less surface alterations and comparable bonding efficacy compared to separate hydrofluoric acid/silane primer application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":94234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of adhesive dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of adhesive dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a42931\",\"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 journal of adhesive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a42931","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

目的探讨不同表面处理对CAD/CAM陶瓷表面形貌及与水泥结合强度的影响。材料与方法从三种材料(二硅酸锂玻璃陶瓷[DL],白晶石基玻璃陶瓷[LC],树脂基陶瓷复合材料[RMCC])中各切割60个立方截面,并进行如下处理(n = 10): 1。没有处理(C);2. 5%氢氟酸加硅烷20秒(HF5% 20秒);3.5%氢氟酸加硅烷60 s (HF5% 60 s);4. 10%氢氟酸加硅烷20秒(HF10% 20秒);5. 10%氢氟酸加硅烷60秒(HF10% 60秒);6. 自蚀刻陶瓷底漆。用复合水泥将陶瓷立方体与预聚合的复合树脂立方体粘合在一起。每组均切成棒状标本(1±0.3 mm2)。储水24 h后,测量微拉伸粘结强度(µTBS)。数据分析采用双因素方差分析和Tukey检验(α = 0.05)。使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)评估失效模式和表面形貌。结果两种因素对µTBS均有显著影响,无交互作用。RMCC的µTBS值在统计学上高于LC和DL,而表面处理HF5% 20 s、HF5% 60 s、HF10% 20 s、HF10% 60 s和MBEP之间没有统计学差异,尽管它们的结合强度在统计学上高于C组。在所有材料的控制组中检测到大量的预测试失败。与所有HF处理相比,MBEP产生的表面改变范围较小。结论所有氢氟酸处理均具有相似的水泥-陶瓷粘结效果。与单独应用氢氟酸/硅烷底漆相比,自蚀刻陶瓷底漆产生的表面变化较小,结合效果相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bond Strength of CAD/CAM Restorative Materials Treated with Different Surface Etching Protocols.
PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the surface morphology of CAD/CAM ceramics and on their bond strength to cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty cubic sections were cut from each of three materials (lithium disilicate glass-ceramic [DL], leucite-based glass-ceramic [LC], resin-matrix ceramic composite [RMCC]) and were treated as follows (n = 10): 1. no treatment (C); 2. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF5% 20 s); 3. 5% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF5% 60 s); 4. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 20 s plus silane (HF10% 20 s); 5. 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 s plus silane (HF10% 60 s); 6. Self-etching ceramic primer (MBEP). Ceramic cubes were bonded to pre-polymerized composite resin cubes with a composite cement. Each set was cut into stick-shaped specimens (1 ± 0.3 mm2). After 24-h water storage, microtensile bond strength (µTBS) was measured. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). Failure pattern and surface morphology were assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). RESULTS Both factors significantly influenced µTBS, while no interaction between factors was found. RMCC presented statistically higher µTBS values than LC and DL, while the surface treatments HF5% 20 s, HF5% 60 s, HF10% 20 s, HF10% 60 s and MBEP, did not show statistical differences between them, although they resulted in statistically significantly higher bond strengths than did C groups. A high number of pre-test failures were detected in the control groups for all materials. MBEP produced less extensive surface alterations than did all HF treatments. CONCLUSION All of the hydrofluoric acid treatments tested showed similar cement-ceramic bonding efficacy. The self-etching ceramic primer produced less surface alterations and comparable bonding efficacy compared to separate hydrofluoric acid/silane primer application.
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
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