Comparison of two bond strength testing methodologies for bilayered all-ceramics
Comparison of two bond strength testing methodologies for bilayered all-ceramics
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.dental.2006.05.004
复制
发表时间：
2007-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Valandro, Luiz Felipe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dundar, Mine;Ozcan, Mutlu;Valandro, Luiz Felipe
目标.本研究比较了四种全瓷系统中瓷芯和瓷贴面的剪切粘结强度（SBS）和微拉伸（MTBS）测试方法。将四种不同的陶瓷饰面/芯组合用于SBS和MTBS测试，其中三种为绿宝石，另一种为氟磷灰石，分别对应于其相应的芯，即白榴石增强陶瓷（（IPS）Empress，Ivoclar）、低白榴石增强陶瓷（Finesse，Ceramco）、玻璃渗透氧化铝（In-Ceram Alumina，Vita）和二硅酸锂（IPS）Empress 2，Ivoclar）。根据制造商的说明书（SBS：厚度3 mm;直径5 mm; MTBS：10 mm x 10 mm x 2 mm）制造陶瓷芯（N = 40，SBS测试方法n = 10/组，MTBS测试方法N= 5块/组），并进行超声清洁。将饰面陶瓷（厚度：2 mm）在不锈钢模具中振动和冷凝，并烧制到芯陶瓷材料上。在模具中尝试样本进行微小调整后，再次对其进行超声清洁并嵌入PMMA中。将试样在37 ℃的蒸馏水中储存1周，并在万能试验机（十字头速度：1 mm/min）中进行粘结强度测试。粘结强度（MPa +/- S.D.）并记录失效模式。两种测试方法和全瓷类型之间观察到显著差异（P < 0.05）（双因素方差分析，Tukey检验和Bonferroni）。饰面陶瓷的平均SBS值明显高于二硅酸锂（41 +/- 8 MPa）比低白榴石（28 +/- 4 MPa），玻璃渗透（26 +/- 4 MPa）和白榴石增强（23 +/- 3 MPa）陶瓷，而低白榴石陶瓷的平均MTBS显著更高（15 +/- 2 MPa）与白榴石（12 +/- 2 MPa）、玻璃渗透（9 +/- 1 MPa）和二硅酸锂陶瓷（9 +/- 1 MPa）相比，差异有统计学意义（ANOVA，P <0. 05）。无论是测试方法和核和饰面陶瓷的化学成分的差异影响双层全瓷系统的核和饰面陶瓷之间的粘结强度。(c)2006年，牙科材料学院。由爱思唯尔有限公司出版。保留所有权利。
Objectives. This study compared the shear bond strength (SBS) and microtensile (MTBS) testing methodologies for core and veneering ceramics in four types of all-ceramic systems.Methods. Four different ceramic veneer/core combinations, three of which were feldspathic and the other a fluor-apatite to their respectively corresponding cores, namely leucitereinforced ceramic ((IPS)Empress, Ivoclar), low leucite-reinforced ceramic (Finesse, Ceramco), glass-infiltrated alumina (In-Ceram Alumina, Vita) and lithium disilicate ((IPS)Empress 2, Ivoclar) were used for SBS and MTBS tests. Ceramic cores (N = 40, n = 10/group for SBS test method, N=5blocks/group for MTBS test method) were fabricated according to the manufacturers' instructions (for SBS: thickness, 3 mm; diameter, 5 mm and for MTBS: 10 mm x 10 mm x 2 mm) and ultrasonically cleaned. The veneering ceramics (thickness: 2 mm) were vibrated and condensed in stainless steel moulds and fired onto the core ceramic materials. After trying the specimens in the mould for minor adjustments, they were again ultrasonically cleaned and embedded in PMMA. The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 1 week and bond strength tests were performed in universal testing machines (cross-head speed: 1mm/min). The bond strengths (MPa +/- S.D.) and modes of failures were recorded.Results. Significant difference between the two test methods and all-ceramic types were observed (P < 0.05) (2-way ANOVA, Tukey's test and Bonferroni). The mean SBS values for veneering ceramic to lithium disilicate was significantly higher (41 +/- 8 MPa) than those to low leucite (28 +/- 4 MPa), glass-infiltrated (26 +/- 4 MPa) and leucite-reinforced (23 +/- 3 MPa) ceramics, while the mean MTBS for low leucite ceramic was significantly higher (15 +/- 2 MPa) than those of leucite (12 +/- 2 MPa), glass-infiltrated (9 +/- 1 MPa) and lithium disilicate ceramic (9 +/- 1 MPa) (ANOVA, P < 0.05).Significance. Both the testing methodology and the differences in chemical compositions of the core and veneering ceramics influenced the bond strength between the core and veneering ceramic in bilayered all-ceramic systems. (c) 2006 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.