Premium
Repair bond strength of dental computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufactured ceramics after different surface treatments
Author(s) -
ALTurki Lulwa,
Merdad Yasser,
Abuhaimed Tariq A.,
Sabbahi Dania,
Almarshadi Mazen,
Aldabbagh Raghad
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.919
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1708-8240
pISSN - 1496-4155
DOI - 10.1111/jerd.12635
Subject(s) - materials science , cubic zirconia , bond strength , ceramic , composite material , hydrofluoric acid , yttria stabilized zirconia , metallurgy , adhesive , layer (electronics)
Objective To evaluate the microtensile bond strength of four dental computer‐aided design/computer‐aided manufactured (CAD/CAM) ceramics after application of four different surface treatments. Materials and methods Four dental CAD/CAM ceramics were tested: feldspathic ceramic (VITABLOCKS‐Mark II), polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network (VITA ENAMIC), zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate (VITA SUPRINITY), and yttria‐stabilized zirconia (VITA YZ T). Four surface treatments were applied: no treatment, 5% hydrofluoric acid‐etching, airborne particle abrasion, and tribochemical silica coating. The ceramic blocks were repaired with nanohybrid composite (Tetric N‐Collection). Sixteen test groups of 12 specimens were prepared. After thermocycling, microtensile bond testing was performed. The microtensile strengths values were statistically analyzed using two‐way analysis of variance and Tukey's post‐hoc test. Results Repaired feldspathic and resin polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network ceramics demonstrated superior microtensile bond strengths compared to zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate and yttria‐stabilized zirconia. Etched feldspathic and polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network ceramics had higher bond strength than the untreated groups. Surface treatments did not affect the bond strength of zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate and yttria‐stabilized zirconia with the exception of etching, which reduced the bond strength of yttria‐stabilized zirconia. Conclusion Feldspathic ceramic and polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network were repaired with dental composite after surface etching with hydrofluoric acid. Repair of zirconia‐reinforced lithium silicate and yttria‐stabilized zirconia did not demonstrate promising results. Clinical significance Repair of feldspathic ceramic and polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network restorations may be a cost‐effective means to promote the longevity of dental restorations. However, zirconia and zirconia‐reinforced lithium disilicate restorations do not offer such an option.