We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website and to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage. You will find more information in our privacy policy. By continuing to use our website, you agree to this. Yes, I agree
The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry



Forgotten password?


J Adhes Dent 15 (2013), No. 4     7. Aug. 2013
J Adhes Dent 15 (2013), No. 4  (07.08.2013)

Page 361-368, doi:10.3290/j.jad.a28624, PubMed:23534013

Effect of Resin Cement Type on the Microtensile Bond Strength to Lithium Disilicate Ceramic and Dentin Using Different Test Assemblies
Marocho, Susana María Salazar / Özcan, Mutlu / Amaral, Regina / Bottino, Marco Antonio / Valandro, Luiz Felipe
Purpose: This study evaluated the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of 3 different resin cements to lithium-disilicate ceramic using two assemblies: ceramic-cement-ceramic (CCC) and ceramic-cement-dentin (CCD).
Materials and Methods: The bonding surfaces of lithium disilicate ceramic blocks (5 × 5 × 4 mm) (Nblock = 90) were etched with 4% hydrofluoric acid for 20 s and silanized. Flat dentin surfaces of human third molars were conditioned according to the respective manufacturer's specifications for three types of resin cements (ML: Multilink, Ivoclar-Vivadent; PF: Panavia F, Kuraray; SB: Super Bond C&B, Sun Medical). While one set of ceramic blocks (n = 30) was cemented to another equal set (CCC assembly), another set of ceramic blocks (n = 30) was cemented on flat dentin (CCD assembly). The bonded specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h, and then sectioned along the x- and y-axes to obtain nontrimmed beam specimens. The beam specimens were randomly divided into two conditions: dry condition (DC - immediate testing); and aging condition (AC - thermocycling 12,000 times + water storage for 150 days). The µTBS bond strength test was performed using a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). After debonding, the substrate and adherent surfaces were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope to categorize the failure types. The data were statistically evaluated using 2-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%).
Results: While the mean µTBS of CCC assemblies were significantly influenced by the cement type (p < 0.05) and aging (p < 0.05), CCD assemblies showed a significant effect of the cement (p < 0.05) but not the aging (p > 0.05). Without aging (DC), the mean µTBS (MPa) of SB (26.9) and PF (26.9) were significantly higher than ML (18.5) (p < 0.05). For CCC after aging (AC), SB (26.6) showed higher mean µTBS than those of PF (16.4) and ML (18.5) (p < 0.05). However, in CCD after AC, no significant difference was found between the groups (p > 0.05). In both CCC and CCD assemblies, pre-test failures were the least with SB cement. Regardless of the resin cement type employed and storage conditions, adhesive failures ranged between 35.3% and 88.9%, cohesive failures in cement between 2.3% and 35.3%, and cohesive failures in ceramic between 3.3% and 6.8%.
Conclusion: SB resin cement demonstrated the highest bond strength to a lithium disilicate ceramic in both tests assemblies with and without aging conditions.

Keywords: adhesion, aging, bond strength, ceramic, dentin, lithium disilicate, microtensile bond strength
fulltext (no access granted) order article as PDF-file (20.00 €)