PURPOSE To evaluate the influence of different surface treatments of lithium disilicate glass ceramics on the bonding efficacy of three luting composites. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 450 blocks of e.max CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent) ground with 600-grit silicon carbide paper were prepared and divided into three groups (n = 150) according to the composite cements used: Variolink Esthetic DC (VE), Multilink Automix (MA), and SpeedCEM (SC). Each group was further divided into five subgroups (n = 10) according to the surface treatment performed: no treatment (control), Monobond Plus (MP), 37% phosphoric acid and Monobond Plus (PA), < 5% hydrofluoric acid and Monobond Plus (HF), and Monobond Etch & Prime (ME). All treated ceramic specimens were bonded with three composite cements and light cured. After 24-h water storage and 5000 or 10,000 thermocycles, tensile bond strength (TBS) was measured. The specimens underwent failure mode analysis. The results were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and t-tests with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS The TBSs were significantly influenced by surface treatments (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in HF and ME among most of the groups. Furthermore, ME showed the highest bond strength with MA after 10,000 thermocycling. Most specimens of the ME groups exhibited cohesive failures, whereas a combination of adhesive failures and mixed failures were observed in control, MP, PA, and HF groups. CONCLUSION In the surface treatment of lithium disilicate glass ceramics, Monobond Etch & Prime was found to be a possible substitution for the combination of hydrofluoric acid and Monobond Plus.

Effect of Different Surface Treatments on the Tensile Bond Strength to Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of silanization protocols on the bond strength of two resin cements to a lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. Thirty-two ceramic discs were assigned to 2 groups (n=16): G1 - dual-cured resin cement and G2 - light-cured resin cement. Four subgroups were evaluated according to the used silanization protocol. The glass-ceramic was etched with 10% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and silane was applied for 1 min, as follows: CTL - according to the manufacturer's instructions; HA - dried with hot air; NWA - washed and dried with water and air at room temperature; HWA - washed and dried with hot water and hot air. Thereafter, adhesive was applied and light-cured for 20 s. Silicon molds were used to prepare resin cement cylinders (1x1 mm) on the ceramic surface. The specimens were stored in deionized water at 37 °C for 48 h and subjected to a micro-shear test. The data were submitted to statistical analysis (?#61537;=0.05). Group G1 showed higher bond strengths than G2, except for the CTL and NWA subgroups. Differences as function of the silanization protocol were only observed in G1: HWA (25.13±6.83)≥HA (22.95±7.78)≥CTL(17.44±7.24) ≥NWA(14.63±8.76). For G2 there was no difference among the subgroups. In conclusion, the silanization protocol affected the resin cement/ceramic bond strengths, depending on the material. Washing/drying with hot water and/or hot air increased only the bond strength of the dual-cured resin cement.

/pdf/silanated-surface-treatment-effects-on-the-bond-strength-to-42a5qfb600.pdf

Silanated Surface Treatment: Effects on the Bond Strength to Lithium Disilicate Glass-Ceramic

PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of various surface treatments on the surface structure and shear bond strength (SBS) of different ceramics.

The effect of silane applied to glass ceramics on surface structure and bonding strength at different temperatures.

Objective To test the effects of different adhesive protocols and silane application on the adhesive durability to a Lithium Disilicate reinforced glass ceramic. Methods Forty disks of 13 mm diameter (E.max Press) were used. After etching with 9.5% HF for 20 seconds, disks were randomly assigned into 4 groups according to the adhesive/silane protocol: silane application only (SIL); silane application followed by adhesive (SILXP-XP Bond); silane-containing adhesive (SBU-ScotchBond Universal); silane application followed by silane-containing adhesive (SILSBU). Four resin composite cylinders of 1-mm diameter and 3-mm height were made on each ceramic disk and tested in shear. Specimens were stored in water for 24 hours or 12 months prior to testing. Results were statistically analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey test. Results After 24 hours, the highest SBS values were observed for SILXP and SILSBU. However, after 12 months, SILXP and SILSBU presented a significant reduction in SBS, while the highest SBS were observed for SIL. For SBU, no significant reduction in SBS was observed, however, it showed the lowest SBS after 12 months. Conclusions Regardless of the presence of silane in the composition of SBU, previous silane application is still recommended prior to cementation of Lithium Disilicate. Clinical significance The application of silane as a separate step is recommended prior to cementation of Lithium Disilicate reinforced glass-ceramic, independent of the presence of silane within the universal adhesive solution.

Adhesive/silane application effects on bond strength durability to a lithium disilicate ceramic.

Aim: To assess the influence of different fiberglass post surface treatments on the bond strength (BS) to root dentin. Methods: Thirty bovine root canals were endodontically treated and filled with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. At 24 h after the endodontic filling, the post spaces were prepared with Gates-Glidden drills and #3 drills of the DC White Post system, maintaining a 4 mm apical seal. The roots were randomly divided into three groups: S (fiberglass posts treated with silane), SA (fiberglass posts treated with silane and a hydrophobic adhesive system) and SHA (fiberglass posts treated with silane, followed by drying with hot air). The posts were cemented with a selfadhesive cement (RelyX U200). The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and subjected to the push-out test (0.5 mm/min). Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05) Results: SA and SHA groups showed the highest BS mean values (11.29 and 10.85 MPa, respectively), while the S group presented the lowest BS mean value (7.21 MPa). S group was significantly different from SA and SAH groups. Conclusions: The surface treatment of fiberglass posts influenced BS values.

/pdf/influence-of-different-surface-treatments-of-fiberglass-aajc618s5u.pdf

Influence of different surface treatments of fiberglass posts on the bond strength to dentin

Univ Estadual Paulista, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, Sao Jose dos Campos Dent Sch, Sao Paulo, Brazil

de Carvalho Rf

Papers

Can Heat Treatment Procedures of Pre-hydrolyzed Silane Replace Hydrofluoric Acid in the Adhesion of Resin Cement to Feldspathic Ceramic?