Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2019, vol. 56, nr 3, July-September, p. 245–249

doi: 10.17219/dmp/109349

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

Effect of two universal adhesives on microshear bond strength of resin cement to zirconia

Wpływ dwóch uniwersalnych systemów łączących na wytrzymałość na mikrościnanie wiązania cementu kompozytowego do cyrkonu

Shila Emamieh1,A,D,F, Mahya Elahi1,A,B, Amir Ghasemi1,E,F

1 Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background. Considering the increasing demand of patients for esthetic and durable restorations, zirconia, with its excellent mechanical properties, has overcome most of the limitations of all-ceramic restorations. However, bonding to zirconia is still challenging.
Objectives. This study compared the effect of 2 universal adhesives on the microshear bond strength of resin cement to zirconia after 24 h and 6 months of water storage.
Material and Methods. This in vitro experimental study was performed on 56 zirconia (Prettau® Zirconia) blocks, which were randomly divided into 2 groups. The ScotchbondTM Universal single-component adhesive and the All-Bond UniversalTM 2-component adhesive were used. The PANAVIATM F 2.0 resin cement was bonded to all samples, and they were stored in distilled water for 24 h and 6 months. The microshear bond strength test was then performed, and the data was analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests.
Results. After 24 h of water storage, the All-Bond samples showed significantly higher microshear bond strength than the Scotchbond samples (p < 0.001), but at 6 months, the microshear bond strength of Scotchbond was higher. The bond strength of All-Bond decreased after 6 months (p < 0.001), but no significant change occurred in the bond strength of the Scotchbond samples over time.
Conclusion. The microshear bond strength of resin cement to zirconia depends on the type of adhesive and the duration of water storage. The Scotchbond Universal adhesive resulted in a stronger bond in the long term.

Key words

zirconium oxide, adhesives, resin cement, All-Bond system

Słowa kluczowe

tlenek cyrkonu, systemy łączące, cement kompozytowy, system All-Bond

References (32)

  1. Giordano R, Sabrosa CE. Zirconia: Material background and clinical application. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2010;31(9):710–715.
  2. McLean JW. The science and art of dental ceramics. Oper Dent. 1991;16(4):149–156.
  3. Kohorst P, Borchers L, Strempel J, et al. Low-temperature degradation of different zirconia ceramics for dental applications. Acta Biomater. 2012;8(3):1213–1220.
  4. Amaral R, Ozcan M, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Microtensile bond strength of a resin cement to glass-infiltrated zirconia-reinforced ceramic: The effect of surface conditioning. Dent Mater. 2006;22(3):283–290.
  5. Piascik JR, Wolter SD, Stoner BR. Development of a novel surface modification for improved bonding to zirconia. Dent Mater. 2011;27(5):e99–e105.
  6. Carvalho RF, Rippe MO, Melo RM, Bottino MA, Souza ROA. Resin bond strength to zirconia: Effects of surface treatments and resin cements. Gen Dent. 2019;67(1):71–77.
  7. Van Meerbeek B , De Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: Current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28(3):215–235.
  8. Perdigão J, Sezinando A, Monteiro PC. Laboratory bonding ability of a multi-purpose dentin adhesive. Am J Dent. 2012;25(3):153–158.
  9. Zarone F, Russo S, Sorrentino R. From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: Clinical and experimental considerations. Dent Mater. 2011;27(1):83–96.
  10. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Augthun M, Spiekermann H. Fracture resistance of lithium disilicate-, alumina- and zirconia-based three-unit flexed partial dentures: A laboratory study. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14(3):231–238.
  11. Casucci A, Monticelli F, Goracci C, et al. Effect of surface pre-treatments on the zirconia ceramic–resin cement micro tensile bond strength. Dent Mater. 2011;27(10):1024–1030.
  12. Attia A, Lehmann F, Kern M. Influence of surface conditioning and cleaning methods on resin bonding to zirconia ceramic. Dent Mater. 2011;27(2):207–213.
  13. Magne P, Paranhos MP, Burnett LH Jr. New zirconia primer improves bond strength of resin-based cements. Dent Mater. 2010;26(4):345–352.
  14. de Castro HL, Corazza PH, Paes-Júnior Tde A, Della Bona A. Influence of Y-TZP ceramic treatment and different resin cements on bond strength to dentin. Dent Mater. 2012;28(11):1191–1197.
  15. Phark JH, Duarte S Jr, Blatz M, Sadan A. An in vitro evaluation of the long-term resin bond to a new densely sintered high-purity zirconium-oxide ceramic surface. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(1):29–38.
  16. Reddy SM, Vijitha D, Deepak T, Balasubramanian R, Satish A. Evalu­ation of shear bond strength of zirconia bonded to dentin after various surface treatments of zirconia. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014;14(1):38–41.
  17. Emamieh S, Sadr A, Ghasemi A, Torabzadeh H, Akhavanzanjani V, Tagami J. Effects of solvent drying time on mass change of three adhesives. J Conserv Dent. 2013;16(5):418–422.
  18. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater. 2011;27(1):17–28.
  19. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Poitevin A, et al. Relationship between bond-strength tests and clinical outcomes. Dent Mater. 2010;26(2):e100–e121.
  20. Schittly E, Bouter D, Le Goff S, Degrange M, Attal JP. Compatibility of five self-etching adhesive systems with two resin luting cements. J Adhes Dent. 2010;12(2):137–142.
  21. Seabra B, Arantes-Oliveira S, Portugal J. Influence of multimode universal adhesives and zirconia primer application techniques on zirconia repair. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(2):182–187.
  22. Feitosa VP, Ogliari FA, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Can the hydrophili­city of functional monomers affect chemical interaction? J Dent Res. 2014;93(2):201–206.
  23. Muñoz MA, Luque-Martinez I, Malaquias P, et al. In vitro longevity of bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentin. Oper Dent. 2015;40(3):282–292.
  24. Lim MJ, Yu MK, Lee KW. The effect of continuous application of MDP-containing primer and luting resin cement on bond strength to tribochemical silica-coated Y-TZP. Restor Dent Endod. 2018;43(2):e19.
  25. Tauscher S, Angermann J, Catel Y, Moszner N. Evaluation of alternative monomers to HEMA for dental applications. Dent Mater. 2017;33(7):857–865.
  26. Lung CY, Matinlinna JP. Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: An overview. Dent Mater. 2012;28(5):467–477.
  27. Davis EL, Joynt RB, Yu X, Wieczkowski G Jr. Dentin bonding system shelf life and bond strength. Am J Dent. 1993;6(5):229–231.
  28. Cadenaro M, Breschi L, Rueggeberg FA, et al. Effects of residual etha­nol on the rate and degree of conversion of five experimental resins. Dent Mater. 2009;25(5):621–628.
  29. Ito S, Hashimoto M, Wadgaonkar B, et al. Effects of resin hydrophilicity on water sorption and changes in modulus of elasticity. Biomaterials. 2005;26(33):6449–6459.
  30. Nishitani Y, Yoshiyama M, Donnelly AM, et al. Effects of resin hydrophilicity on dentin bond strength. J Dent Res. 2006;85(11):1016–1021.
  31. Hosaka K, Nakajima M, Takahashi M, et al. Relationship between mechanical properties of one-step self-etch adhesives and water sorption. Dent Mater. 2010;26(4):360–367.
  32. Malacarne J, Carvalho RM, de Goes MF, et al. Water sorption/solubility of dental adhesive resins. Dent Mater. 2006;22(10):973–980.