Effect of Different Surface Applications and Adhesive Systems on Bond Strength of Porcelain Repair Material

Abstract:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments and adhesive systems on bond strength of composite resin to porcelain when there is need to repair the restoration.Materials and methods: Rectangular discs (10mm x 12mm) with a height of 2mm were prepared from leucite-reinforced feldspathic ceramic CAD/CAM blocks (Vitablocs), embedded in acrylic resin, and bur cut porcelain surfaces were created. The specimens were divided into three groups (n=20) according to the surface treatments: Er:YAG laser at 2W for 20 seconds, air abrasion with 50µm Al₂O₃ at 2.5 bar for 15 seconds, and the last group left untreated as control. After silane (Monobond S) application on ten specimens from each group, composite rods (Aelite Flo LV) with 4.25mm diameter and 4mm height were bonded to ceramic surfaces with a self-etch adhesive system (All-Bond SE). The remaining ten specimens from each group were etched with 36% orthophosphoric acid (Blue Etch Dental Etching Gel), and after silane and bonding agent (One-Step Plus) application composite rods with the mentioned dimensions were bonded. All groups were stored in distilled water at 37°C for one day before mechanical testing. Shear testing of all groups were performed on a universal testing machine with a load cell of 50kg and at a crosshead speed of 1.5mm/min. Results were statistically analyzed using Mann Whitney U and Kruskall Wallis tests.Results: The bond strength values of the self-etch adhesive system in the lased and control groups were statistically higher in comparison to the other adhesive system (p<0.01, p<0.05, respectively). The highest bond strength values were obtained in the Er:YAG lased and self-etch adhesive applied group.Conclusions: When there is need to repair of a porcelain restoration, a self-etch adhesive application after Er:YAG laser treatment could be the method of choice.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 493-494)
• Pages: 643-648
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.493-494.643
• Online since: October 2011
• Authors: Bilge Tarcin, Gulden Sinmazisik, Fusun Ozer, Turgut Gülmez
• Keywords: Adhesive System, Air Abrasion, Composite, Laser, Porcelain Repair

References

[1] D.R. Haselton, A. Diaz-Arnold, J.T. Jr. Dunne, Shear bond strengths of 2 intraoral porcelain repair systems to porcelain or metal substrates, J. Prosthet. Dent. 86 (2001) 526-31.

DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2001.119843

[2] M. Özcan, W. Niedermeier, Clinical study on the reasons for and location of failures of metal-ceramic restorations and survival of repairs, Int. J. Prosthodont. 15 (2002) 299-302.

[3] R.E. Appledoorn, T.M. Wilwerding, W.W. Barkmeier, Bond strength of composite resin to porcelain with newer generation porcelain repair systems, J. Prosthet. Dent. 70 (1993) 6-11.

DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(93)90029-n

[4] W.P. Kelsey 3rd, M.A. Latta, C.M. Stanislav, R.S. Shaddy, Comparison of composite resin-to-porcelain bond strength with three adhesives, Dent. Mater. 48 (2000) 418-21.

[5] K.H. Chung, Y.C. Hwang, Bomding strengths of porcelain repair systems with various surface treatments, J. Prosthet. Dent. 78 (1997) 267-74.

[6] J.M. Ferrando, G.N. Graser, R.H. Tallents, R.H. Jarvis, Tensile strength and microleakage of porcelain repair materials, J. Prosthet. Dent. 50 (1983) 44-50.

DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(83)90164-6

[7] M. Özcan, P.K. Valittu, Effect of surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of luting cements to ceramics, Dent. Mater. 19 (2003) 725-31.

DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(03)00019-8

[8] E.G. Reston, S.C. Filho, G. Arossi, R.B. Cogo, C.S. Rocha, L.Q. Closs, Repairing ceramic restorations: final solution or alternative procedure, Oper. Dent. 33 (2008) 461-66.

DOI: 10.2341/07-151

[9] T.S. Goia, F.P. Leite, L.F. Valondro, M. Özcan, M.A. Bottino, repair bond strength of a resin composite to alumina reinforced feldspathic ceramic, Int. J. Prosthodont. 19 (2006) 400-2.

[10] H.S. Öveçoğlu, G. Sınmazışık, Y. Garip, M. Günday, E. Eti, T. Gülmez, M.L. Öveçoğlu, Evaluation of porcelain surface treatments and agents for composite to rorcelain repair, Key Eng. Mater.  264-268 (2004) 2039-42.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/kem.264-268.2039

[11] B. Gokce, B. Ozpinar, M. Dundar, E. Comlekoglu, B.H. Sen, M. A Gungor, Bond strengths of allceramics: acid vs laser etching, Oper. Dent. 32 (2007) 173–78.

[12] C.H. Pameijer, N.P. Louw, D. Fischer, Repairing fractured porcelain: how surface preparation affects shear force resistance, J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 127 (1996) 203-9.

DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1996.0170

[13] J.H. Chen, H. Matsumara, M. Atsuta, Effect of etchant, etching period, and silane priming onbond strength to porcelain of composite resin, Oper. Dent. 23 (1998) 250-7.

[14] M. Kern, V.P. Thompson, Sandblasting and silica coating of a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic; volume loss, morphology, and changes in the surface composition, J. Prosthet. Dent. 71 (1994) 453-61.

DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(94)90182-1

[15] D.M. Wolf, J.M. Powers, K.L. O'Keefe, Bond strength of composite to etched and sandblasted porcelain, Am. J. Dent. 6 (1993) 155-8.

[16] S. Parker, The use of lasers in fixed prosthodontics, Dent. Clin. North Am. 48 (2004) 971-98.

[17] M.S. Akyıl, İ.H. Uzun, F. Bayındır, Bond strength of resin cement to yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconia ceramic treated with air abrasion, silica coating, and laser irradiation, Photomed. Laser Surg. 28 (2010) 801-8.

DOI: 10.1089/pho.2009.2697