Bond strength durability of a resin composite on a reinforced ceramic using various repair systems.

University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Dentistry and Dental Hygiene, Clinical Dental Biomaterials, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands.
Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials (Impact Factor: 2.88). 09/2009; 25(12):1477-83. DOI: 10.1016/
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study compared the durability of repair bond strength of a resin composite to a reinforced ceramic after three repair systems.
Alumina-reinforced feldspathic ceramic blocks (Vitadur-alpha) (N=30) were randomly divided into three groups according to the repair method: PR-Porcelain Repair Kit (Bisco) [etching with 9.5% hydrofluoric acid+silanization+adhesive]; CJ-CoJet Repair Kit (3M ESPE) [(chairside silica coating with 30microm SiO(2)+silanization (ESPE)-Sil)+adhesive (Visio-Bond)]; CL-Clearfil Repair Kit [diamond surface roughening, etching with 40% H(3)PO(4)+Clearfil Porcelain Bond Activator+Clearfil SE Bond)]. Resin composite was photo-polymerized on each conditioned ceramic block. Non-trimmed beam specimens were produced for the microtensile bond strength (microTBS) tests. In order to study the hydrolytic durability of the repair methods, the beam specimens obtained from each block were randomly assigned to two conditions. Half of the specimens were tested either immediately after beam production (Dry) or after long-term water storage (37 degrees C, 150 days) followed by thermocyling (12,000 cycles, 5-55 degrees C) in a universal testing machine (1mm/min). Failure types were analyzed under an optical microscope and SEM.
microTBS results were significantly affected by the repair method (p=0.0001) and the aging conditions (p=0.0001) (two-way ANOVA, Tukey's test). In dry testing conditions, PR method showed significantly higher (p<0.001) repair bond strength (19.8+/-3.8MPa) than those of CJ and CL (12.4+/-4.7 and 9.9+/-2.9, respectively). After long-term water storage and thermocycling, CJ revealed significantly higher results (14.5+/-3.1MPa) than those of PR (12.1+/-2.6MPa) (p<0.01) and CL (4.2+/-2.1MPa) (p<0.001). In all groups when tested in dry conditions, cohesive failure in the composite accompanied with adhesive failure at the interface (mixed failures), was frequently observed (76%, 80%, 65% for PR, CJ and CL, respectively). After aging conditions, while the specimens treated with PR and CJ presented primarily mixed failure types (52% and 87%, respectively), CL group presented mainly complete adhesive failures at the interface (70%).
Hydrolytic stability of the repair method based on silica coating and silanization was superior to the other repair strategies for the ceramic tested.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: In the last decade, repair of restorations has become more and more popular while teaching repair of restorations is now included in most universities in Europe and North America. The aim of this paper was therefore to systematically review the clinical and the in vitro aspects of repair of restorations by considering different restorative materials - resin-based composites, amalgam, glass-ionomer cements, ceramics or metals. The paper gives also an overview of the occurrences of teaching repair in different universities. Furthermore, the paper outlines criteria for decision making when to treat a defect restoration with refurbishment, repair, replacement or no treatment. DATA: The database search strategy for resin based composite restoration repair (n=360) and the following hand search (n=95) retrieved 455 potentially eligible studies. After de-duplication, 260 records were examined by the titles and abstracts. 154 studies were excluded and 106 articles were assessed for eligibility by analyzing the full texts. Following the same search and selection process, 42 studies for amalgam repair, 51 studies for cast, inlay or porcelain restoration repair and 8 studies for teaching were assessed for eligibility by analysis of the full texts. SOURCES: Following databases were analyzed: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS and PUBMED. STUDY SELECTION: Papers were selected if they met the following criteria: replacement, refurbishment or repair of resin composite restorations or amalgam restorations or inlay, cast restoration or porcelain repair. Clinical studies, in vitro studies and reports about teaching were included. CONCLUSIONS: Repair of restoration is a valuable method to improve the quality of restorations and is accepted, practiced and taught in many universities. However, there is a need for methodologically sound randomized controlled long-term clinical trials to be able to give an evidence based recommendation.
    Dental materials: official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials 08/2012; · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To investigate the repair potential of CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) ceramic and composite blocks using a silane-containing bonding agent with different repair protocols.
    European journal of dentistry 01/2014; 8(1):44-52.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigated the effect of neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd: YAG) laser irradiation on surface properties and bond strength of zirconia ceramics. Specimens of zirconia ceramic pieces were divided into 11 groups according to surface treatments as follows: one control group (no treatment), one air abrasion group, and nine laser groups (Nd: YAG irradiation). The laser groups were divided by applying with different output power (1, 2, or 3 W) and irradiation time (30, 60, or 90 s). Following surface treatments, the morphological characteristics of ceramic pieces was observed, and the surface roughness was measured. All specimens were bonded to resin cement. After, stored in water for 24 h and additionally aged by thermocycling, the shear bond strength was measured. Dunnett's t test and one-way ANOVA were performed as the statistical analyses for the surface roughness and the shear bond strength, respectively, with α = .05. Rougher surface of the ceramics could be obtained by laser irradiation with higher output power (2 and 3 W). However, cracks and defects were also found on material surface. The shear bond strength of laser groups was not obviously increased, and it was significantly lower than that of air abrasion group. No significant differences of the shear bond strength were found among laser groups treated with different output power or irradiation time. Nd: YAG laser irradiation cannot improve the surface properties of zirconia ceramics and cannot increase the bond strength of the ceramics. Enhancing irradiation power and extending irradiation time cannot induce higher bond strength of the ceramics and may cause material defect.
    Lasers in Medical Science 07/2013; · 2.40 Impact Factor


Available from
May 26, 2014