English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

: This in vitro study compared the shear bond strength and failure type produced by three surface treatments on a non-noble metal alloy cast. Materials and methods : Ninety six cylinders cast in a non-noble metal alloy (Argeloy® N.P. Star, Argen®), grouped in pairs for 48 double specimens in total received three different surface treatments: no sandblasting control (group 1); sandblasting with 110-μm Al2O3 (group 2) and sandblasting with 50-μm Al2O3, (group 3). Each group was divided in two subgroups to be bound with two different resin based luting cements and metal conditioners (Monobond® Plus + Multilink® N, Ivoclar Vivadent®-ml; and Metal Primer ii + gcem, gc Corporation (gc). All specimens were aged in distilled water at a constant 37°C for 8 weeks and tested for shear bond strength. Failure type was examined by stereomicroscopy. Results : The mean shear bond strengths (in MPa) after aging were 11.02 (control gc), 9.52 (control ml), 10.08 (50 gc), 11.72 (50 ml), 7.85 (110 gc), 8.12 (110 ml). There was a statistically significant difference among groups. The lower shear bond strength was for the group that was sandblasted with 110-μm Al2O3 for both cements. Conclusion: In the metal to metal bonding protocol sandblasting is not required.

Comparación de adhesión y tipo de falla en una aleación no noble