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: 4.16). 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.

Download full-text


Available from: Mutlu Özcan, Feb 18, 2014
  • Source
    • "The present study stated that Cojet and Clearfil system applications increased bond strength between zirconia and composite resin. This result did not coincide with the conclusions of Ozcan et al. [25]. They evaluated the durability of repair bond strength of a composite to ceramic after different repair systems. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective. The aim of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of composite resin in five different repair systems. Materials and methods. Sixty specimens (7 mm in diameter and 3 mm in height) of zirconia ceramic were fabricated. All specimen surfaces were prepared with a 30 µm fine diamond rotary cutting instrument with water irrigation for 10 s and dried with oil-free air. Specimens were then randomly divided into six groups for the following different intra-oral repair systems (n = 10): Group 1, control group; Group 2, Cojet system (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany); Group 3, Cimara® System (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany); Group 4, Z-Prime Plus System (Bisco Inc., Schaumburg, IL); Group 5, Clearfil™ System (Kuraray, Osaka, Japan); and Group 6, Z-Bond System (Danville, CA). After surface conditioning, a composite resin Grandio (Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany) was applied to the zirconia surface using a cylindrical mold (5 mm in diameter and 3 mm in length) and incrementally filled up, according to the manufacturer's instructions of each intra-oral system. Each specimen was subjected to a shear load at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until fracture. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post-hoc tests were used to analyze the bond strength values. Results. There were significant differences between Groups 2-6 and Group 1. The highest bond strength values were obtained with Group 2 (17.26 ± 3.22) and Group 3 (17.31 ± 3.62), while the lowest values were observed with Group 1 (8.96 ± 1.62) and Group 6 (12.85 ± 3.95). Conclusion. All repair systems tested increased the bond strength values between zirconia and composite resin that used surface grinding with a diamond bur.
    Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 11/2014; 73(1):1-5. DOI:10.3109/00016357.2014.946963 · 1.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of surface treatment (conditioning) methods on dental ceramics is to improve the retention and bonding between the enamel or the dentin and ceramic veneer, with the help of resin composite luting cements. These types of surface treatments include chemically altering the surface of ceramics with some specific acidic etchants followed by applying a silane coupling agent (silane). The silane currently used in dentistry is 3-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, a hybrid organic–inorganic trialkoxy ester monomer, which is diluted in an acidified water-ethanol solvent system. Such silane primers are said to be pre-hydrolyzed. Some oxide ceramics with high crystalline content, such as alumina and zirconia, cannot be easily etched with acid etchants. They should be silica-coated and silanized prior to bonding. A silane coupling agent should be applied after silica-coating to the ceramic surface to achieve chemical bonding and the optimal durable bond strength. KeywordsSilane coupling agent–Silane–Silica-coating–Hydrofluoric acid–Acid etchants–Zirconia
    Silicon 07/2011; 3(3):117-123. DOI:10.1007/s12633-011-9079-6 · 0.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The development of fibre reinforced composite materials and technologies and the improvement strength of all?ceramics with the introduction of reinforced ceramic core materials of different compositions offer minimally invasive and increased esthetic clinical alternatives for various kinds of fixed partial restorations. Fracture of composite veneers in fibre reinforced composites or chipping of all?ceramic restorations may cause the loss of the restoration unless a reliable intraoral repair method can be provided. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of three commercially available repair kits on repair bond strength, surface roughness and wettability on all?ceramic and fibre reinforced composite materials.
    Material Research Innovations 01/2011; 15(1):17-23. DOI:10.1179/143307511X12922272563626 · 0.47 Impact Factor
Show more