International Journal of Clinical Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume 6, Issue 2, December 2020, Pages: 44-48
Received: Mar. 9, 2020;
Accepted: Mar. 23, 2020;
Published: Sep. 25, 2020
Views 211 Downloads 32
Linfu Han, Department of Stomatology, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Baotou, China
Lijun Liu, Department of Stomatology, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Baotou, China
Huanhuan Zhang, Department of Stomatology, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Baotou, China
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dentin bond strength of restorations made of different polymeric materials with Single Bond Universal Adhensive and etch-and-bond resin cement. Ceromer (ceramage, Shofu), Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA DISK, Yamahachi), resin nanoceramic (Lava Ultimate, 3M ESPE), and polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network (Vita Enamic, Vita Zahnfabrik) specimens (n=15/group) were fabricated respectively. Dentin specimens were prepared from extracted third molars stored in distilled water in a refrigerator (4°C). Single Bond Universal Adhensive was applied to the prepared tooth and light cured. Then, specimens were cemented using 3M ESPE RelyXTM Uitimate ClikerTM adhesive resin cement. All cemented specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 h and subjected to shear forces by a universal testing machine. Vita Enamic was found to show the highest shear bond strength values. The shear bond strength of Lava Ultimate was weaker than that of Vita Enamic. But there was no statistical difference between Vita Enamic and Lava Ultimate. Both of them showed significantly higher shear bond strength than the Ceramage and PMMA groups. The lowest values were obtained for PMMA and there was a significant difference between the PMMA and Ceramage groups. The bond strength of the polymeric materials is material dependent. So doctors can use them for patients with different intent.
Shear Bond Strength of Polymeric to Dentin, International Journal of Clinical Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.
Vol. 6, No. 2,
2020, pp. 44-48.
Kassem AS, Atta O, El-Mowafy O. Fatigue resistance and microleakage of CAD/CAM ceramic and composite molar crowns. J Prosthodont 2012; 21 (1): 28-32.
Barizon KT, Bergeron C, Vargas MA, Qian F, Cobb DS, Gratton DG, Geraldeli S. Ceramic materials for porcelain veneers: Part II. Effect of material, shade, and thickness on translucency. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112 (4): 864-870.
Ruse ND, Sadoun MJ. Resin-composite Blocks for Dental CAD/CAM Applications. J Dent Res 2014; 93 (12): 1232–1234.
Mörmann WH, Stawarczyk B, Ender A, Sener B, Attin T, Mehl A. Wear characteristics of current aesthetic dental restorative CAD/CAM materials: two-body wear, gloss retention, roughness and Martens hardness. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2013; 20: 113–125.
Xing W, Jiang T, Ma X, Liang S, Wang Z, Sa Y, Wang Y. Evaluation of the esthetic effect of resin cements and try-in pastes on ceromer veneers. J Dent 2010; 38 Suppl 2: e87-94.
Dukic W, Dukic OL, Milardovic S, Delija B. Clinical evaluation of indirect composite restorations at baseline and 36 months after placement. Oper Dent 2010; 35 (2): 156-164.
Ferracane JL. Resin composite—State of the art. Dent Mater 2011; 27 (1): 29-38.
da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, Loguércio AD, Demarco FF. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent 2006; 34 (7): 427-435.
Grivas E, Roudsari RV, Satterthwaite JD. Composite inlays: a systematic review. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2014; 22 (3): 117-124.
Carvalho AO, Bruzi G, Giannini M, Magne P. Fatigue resistance of CAD/CAM complete crowns with a simpliﬁed cementation process. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 111 (4): 310-317.
Stawarczyk B, Özcan M, Trottmann A, Schmutz F, Roos M, Hämmerle C. Two-body wear rate of CAD/CAM resin blocks and their enamel antagonists. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109 (5): 325-332.
Krämer N, Kunzelmann KH, Taschner M, Mehl A, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R. Antagonist enamel wears more than ceramic inlays. J Dent Res 2006; 85 (12): 1097-1100.
Magne P, Perakis N, Belser UC, Krejci I. Stress distribution of inlay-anchored adhesive fixed partial dentures: a finite element analysis of the influence of restorative materials and abutment preparation design. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87 (5): 516-527.
Rocca GT, Bonnafous F, Rizcalla N, Krejci I. A technique to improve the esthetic aspects of CAD/CAM composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104 (4): 273-275.
Lin CL, Chang YH, Liu PR. Multi-factorial analysis of a cusp-replacing adhesive premolar restoration: a finite element study. J Dent 2008; 36 (3): 194-203.
Ender A, Bienz S, Mörmann W, Mehl A, Attin T, Stawarczyk B. Marginal adaptation, fracture load and macroscopic failure mode of adhesively luted PMMA-based CAD/CAM inlays. Dent Mater 2016; 32 (2): e22-29.
Poggio C, Pigozzo M, Ceci M, Scribante A, Beltrami R, Chiesa M. Influence of different luting protocols on shear bond strength of computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing resin nanoceramic material to dentin. Dent Res J 2016; 13 (2): 91-97.
Elsaka SE. Bond strength of novel CAD/CAM restorative materials to self-adhesive resin cement: the effect of surface treatments. J Adhes Dent 2014; 16 (6): 531-540.
Bähr N, Keul C, Edelhoff D, Eichberger M, Roos M, Gernet W, Stawarczyk B. Effect of different adhesives combined with two resin composite cements on shear bond strength to polymeric CAD/CAM materials. Dent Mater J 2013; 32 (3): 492-501.
Al-Dohan HM, Yaman P, Dennison JB, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. Shear strength of core-veneer interface in bi-layered ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91 (4): 349-355.
Cardoso PE, Braga RR, Carrilho MR. Evaluation of micro-tensile, shear and tensile tests determining the bond strength of three adhesive systems. Dent Mater 1998; 14 (6): 394-398.
Goujat A, Abouelleil H, Colon P, Jeannin C, Pradelle N, Seux D, Grosgogeat B. Mechanical properties and internal fit of 4 CAD-CAM block materials. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 119 (3): 384-389.
Vita Enamic. Vita Enamic Concept Brochure. Available at https://www.vita-zahnfabrik.com/datei.php?src=portal/sap/dateien/c/cc0/cc0c01/Konzeptbroschuere/VITA_10024E_ENAMIC_PS_EN_V02.Pdf.
Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM Restorative. Lava Ultimate Brochure. Available at http://multimedia.3m. com/mws/mediawebserver?Mwsld=66666UgxGCuNyXTt08T_oxT6EVtQEcuZgVs6E666666-&fn=Lava_Ultimate_F_UK.pdf.
www.3mespe.com/Single bond universal [Online].
Soares CJ, Giannini M, Oliveira MT, Paulillo LA, Martins LR. Effect of surface treatments of laboratory-fabricated composites on the microtensile bond strength to a luting resin cement. J Appl Oral Sci 2014; 12 (1): 45-50.
Söderholm KJ, Shang SW. Molecular orientation of silane at the surface of colloidal silica. J Dent Res 1993; 72 (6): 1050-1054.
Flury S, Schmidt SZ, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A. Dentin bond strength of two resin-ceramic computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials and five cements after six months storage. Dent Mater J 2016; 35 (5): 728-735.
Cekic-Nagas I, Ergun G, Egilmez F, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Micro-shear bond strength of different resin cements to ceramic/glass-polymer CAD/CAM block materials. J Prosthodont Res 2016; 60 (4): 265-273.
Leinfelder KF. New developments in resin restorative systems. J Am Dent Assoc 1997; 128 (5): 573-581.
Hanabusa M, Mine A, Kuboki T, Momoi Y, Van Ende A, Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J. Bonding effectiveness of a new ‘multi-mode’ adhesive to enamel and dentine. J Dent 2012; 40 (6): 475-484.
Liebermann A, Keul C, Bähr N, Edelhoff D, Eichberger M, Roos M, Stawarczyk B. Impact of plasma treatment of PMMA-based CAD/CAM blanks on surface properties as well as on adhesion to self-adhesive resin composite cements. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (9): 935-944.
Huetting F, Prutscher A, Goldammer C, Kreutzer CA, Weber H. First clinical experiences with CAD/CAM-fabricated PMMA-based fixed dental prostheses as long-term temporaries. Clin Oral Investing 2016; 20 (1): 161-168.