Effects of ceramic surface treatments on the bond strength of an adhesive luting agent to CAD-CAM ceramic
Effects of ceramic surface treatments on the bond strength of an adhesive luting agent to CAD-CAM ceramic
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jdent.2006.09.006
复制
发表时间：
2007-04-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Van Meerbeek, B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Peumans, M.;Hikita, K.;Van Meerbeek, B.
目的：本研究的目的是评估不同的表面处理对微拉伸粘结强度（μ TBS）的粘合剂粘接剂的CAD-CAM陶瓷的效果。测试的假设是，无论是表面处理将产生更高的粘结强度的粘合剂的粘接剂CAD-CAM ceramic.Methods：陶瓷标本的两种不同的尺寸（6毫米× 8毫米× 3毫米; 13毫米× 8毫米× 4毫米）制成的ProCAD陶瓷块（Ivoclar Vivadent）与低速金刚石锯。将陶瓷块分为7组，并进行以下表面处理：第1组：未处理;第2组：用37%H3PO4蚀刻;第3组：用37%H3PO4+硅烷蚀刻;第4组：用37%H3PO4+硅烷+粘合剂树脂蚀刻;第5组：用4.9%HF酸蚀刻;第6组：用37%H3PO4+硅烷+粘合剂树脂蚀刻。第7组：氢氟酸+硅烷+粘接树脂。表面处理后，两个不同尺寸的瓷盘用复合粘结剂（Variolink II，Ivoclar-Vivadent）粘结在一起。在mu TBS测试之前，将样本在37 ℃的蒸馏水中储存24小时。单因素方差分析用于检验表面处理的影响，Scheffe多重比较检验确定成对统计学差异实验组之间的mu TBS（p < 0.05）。（标准差）为：第1组：12.8（+/- 4.6）MPa;第2组：19.1（+/- 5.0）MPa;第3组：27.4（+/- 11.1）MPa;组4：34.0（+/- 8.9）MPa;组5：37.6（+/- 8.4）MPa;组6：34.6（+/- 12.8）MPa;组7：34.5（+/- 5.1）MPa。组1与组3-7之间以及组2与组4-7之间存在统计学显著差异。第1-4组的所有试样均表现出粘结破坏，而第5- 7组的试样中观察到粘结和混合（粘结和内聚）破坏的组合。结论：结果表明，表面处理对粘结到陶瓷是重要的，并建议最好使用氢氟酸而不是磷酸进行蚀刻。(c)2006爱思唯尔有限公司保留所有权利。
Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on the micro-tensile bond strength ( mu TBS) of an adhesive luting agent to CAD-CAM ceramic. The hypothesis tested was that neither of the surface treatments would produce higher bond strength of the adhesive luting agent to CAD-CAM ceramic.Methods: Ceramic specimens of two different sizes (6 mm x 8 mm x 3 mm; 13 mm x 8 mm x 4 mm) were fabricated from ProCAD ceramic blocs (Ivoclar-Vivadent) with a low-speed diamond saw. The ceramic blocks were divided into seven groups and submitted to the following surface treatments: group 1: no treatment; group 2: etching with 37% H3PO4; group 3: etching with 37% H3PO4 + silane; group 4: etching with 37% H3PO4 + silane + adhesive resin; group 5: etching with 4.9% HF acid; group 6: etching with 4.9% HF acid + silane; group 7: etching with HF acid + silane + adhesive resin. After surface treatment, two differently sized porcelain disks were bonded together with a composite luting agent (Variolink II, Ivoclar-Vivadent). The specimens were stored for 24 h in distilled water at 37 degrees C prior to mu TBS testing. One-way analysis of variance was used to test the influence of surface treatment and Scheffe multiple comparisons test determined pair-wise statistical differences (p < 0.05) in mu TBS between the experimental groups.Results: The mean mu TBSs (standard deviation) are: group 1: 12.8 (+/- 4.6) MPa; group 2: 19.1 (+/- 5.0) MPa; group 3: 27.4 (+/- 11.1) MPa; group 4:34.0 (+/- 8.9) MPa; group 5: 37.6 (+/- 8.4) MPa; group 6: 34.6 (+/- 12.8) MPa; group 7: 34.5 (+/- 5.1) MPa. Statistical significant differences were found between group 1 and groups 3-7, and between group 2 and groups 4-7. All specimens of groups 1-4 exhibited adhesive failures, while a combination of adhesive and mixed (adhesive and cohesive) failures was observed in the specimens of groups 5-7.Conclusions: The results show that surface treatment is important to bond to ceramic and suggests that etching is needed preferably with hydrofluoric acid than with phosphoric acid. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.