Effect of Various Surface Treatments on Ti-Base Coping Retention

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 426-434
Author(s):  
K Kemarly ◽  
SC Arnason ◽  
A Parke ◽  
W Lien ◽  
KS Vandewalle
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Chemical Surface ◽  
Cement Interface ◽  
Mechanical Surface Treatment ◽  
Access Channel ◽  
Mechanical Surface

Clinical Relevance Mechanical surface roughening of the titanium-abutment base is necessary to increase the pull-off bond strength of the lithium disilicate abutment material. Additional chemical surface treatment may further increase the bond strength, but the effects are product specific. SUMMARY Objective: The titanium-cement interface of a Ti-Base implant crown must be able to resist intraoral pull-off forces. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of mechanical and chemical surface treatments of a titanium-abutment base (Ti-Base, Dentsply/Sirona) on the pull-off bond strength of a lithium disilicate abutment coping. Methods and Materials: Ti-Bases were divided into nine groups of 10 copings each that varied in both mechanical surface treatment (none; Al2O3 air abrasion; CoJet silicoating, 3M ESPE) and chemical treatments (none; Monobond Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent; Alloy Primer, Kuraray). Lithium disilicate abutment copings (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) were designed and milled. After crystallization, the copings were cemented onto the Ti-Bases with a resin cement (MultiLink Hybrid-Abutment Cement, Ivoclar Vivadent) according to the manufacturer's recommendations. The copings were torqued to a mounted implant, and the access channel was sealed with composite. After 24-hour storage and 2000 thermal-cycles in distilled water, the copings were subjected to a removal force parallel to the long axis of the interface until fracture. Data were analyzed with multiple one-way analyses of variance and Tukey post hoc tests (α=0.05). Results: Significant differences were found between groups based on type of surface treatment (p<0.05). Conclusions: Chemical surface treatment with Monobond Plus and mechanical surface treatment with CoJet silicoating or Al2O3 air abrasion resulted in the greatest pull-off bond strength. Alloy Primer did not provide a statistically significant increased pull-off bond strength when the surfaces were mechanically treated with Al2O3 air abrasion or CoJet silicoating. The lack of any mechanical surface treatment resulted in the lowest pull-off bond strength regardless of the type of chemical surface treatment.

scholarly journals Surface Treatment Effect on Shear Bond Strength between Lithium Disilicate Glass-Ceramic and Resin Cement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siripan Simasetha ◽  
Awiruth Klaisiri ◽  
Tool Sriamporn ◽  
Kraisorn Sappayatosok ◽  
Niyom Thamrongananskul
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Glass Ceramic ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ceramic Bond

Abstract Objective The study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDGC) and resin cement (RC) using different surface treatments. Materials and Methods LDGC blocks (Vintage LD Press) were prepared, etched with 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, and randomly divided into seven groups (n = 10), depending on the surface treatments. The groups were divided as follows: 1) no surface treatment (control), 2) Silane Primer (KS), 3) Signum Ceramic Bond I (SGI), 4) Signum Ceramic Bond I/Signum Ceramic Bond II (SGI/SGII), 5) experimental silane (EXP), 6) experimental silane/Signum Ceramic Bond II (EXP/SGII), and 7) Experimental/Adper Scotchbond Multi-purpose Adhesive (EXP/ADP). The specimens were cemented to resin composite blocks with resin cement and stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours. The specimens underwent 5,000 thermal cycles and were subjected to the SBS test. Mode of failure was evaluated under the stereo microscope. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed with Welch ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Results The highest mean SBS showed in group EXP/ADP (45.49 ± 3.37 MPa); however, this was not significantly different from group EXP/SGII (41.38 ± 2.17 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). The lowest SBS was shown in the control group (18.36 ± 0.69 MPa). This was not significantly different from group KS (20.17 ± 1.10 MPa) (p ≥ 0.05). Conclusions The different surface treatments significantly affected the SBS value between LDGC and RC. The application of pure silane coupling agent with or without the application of an adhesive improved the SBS value and bond quality.

scholarly journals Shear Bond Strength of Composite Repair System to Bilayered Zirconia Using Different Surface Treatments (In Vitro Study)

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Atef Baiomy ◽  
Jihan Farouk Younis ◽  
Ahmed Hassanen Khalil
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Treatment Method ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Repair System ◽  
Cohesive Failure ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Composite Repair ◽  
Mode Of Failure

Objective:  the study is aimed to evaluate the effect of different surface treatment methods on shear bond strength between composite repair system and both of zirconia core and veneering porcelain and analyze the mode of failure between composite repair and ceramic surface. Material and methods: 40 Ceramic discs were fabricated with diameter of 7mm and 3mm thickness and divided according to material into two groups, Zirconia core discs (n = 20) and veneering porcelain discs (n = 20). Specimens were thermocycled and then each group was subdivided according to surface treatment method into 4 equal sub groups (n = 5) ,control subgroup I air abrasion, subgroup II Cojet, subgroup III laser, subgroup IV combination of air abrasion and laser surface treatment. Composite blocks were built up and polymerized on the surface of the specimens and shear bond strength of composite to each specimen was tested using a universal testing machine and mode of failure was evaluated using stereomicroscope. Results: Regardless of ceramic type; there was a statistically significant difference between surface treatments. Cojet recorded the highest mean shear bond strength. Laser showed the highest prevalence of adhesive failure.  Porcelain + Cojet showed the highest prevalence of cohesive failure. Conclusion: Cojet surface treatment provided superior shear bond strength regardless of the ceramic type whether zirconia or porcelain. Porcelain provided superior shear bond strength values in comparison to zirconia regardless of the surface treatment method tested. Porcelain showed higher percentage of cohesive failure that while the mode of failure in zirconia was most commonly adhesive.KEYWORDS Laser; Porcelain repair; Zirconia repair. 

scholarly journals Structural and Morphological Evaluation of Presintered Zirconia following Different Surface Treatments

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hasan Skienhe ◽  
Roland Habchi
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Phase Transformation ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Ceramic Powder ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Morphological Evaluation

ABSTRACT Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on roughness, grain size, and phase transformation of presintered zirconia. Materials and methods Surface treatments included airborne particle abrasion (APA) before and after sintering with different particles shape, size, and pressure (50 μm Al2O3, 50 μm glass beads, and ceramic powder). Thirty-five square-shaped presintered yttrium-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) ceramic slabs (Zenostar ZR bridge, Wieland) were prepared (4 mm height × 10 mm width × 10 mm length) and polished with silicon carbide grit papers #800, 1000, 1200, 1500, and 2000 to ensure identical initial roughness. Specimens were divided into five groups according to surface treatment: group I (control): no surface treatment; group II: APA 50 μm Al2O3 after sintering; group III: APA 50 μm Al2O3 particles before sintering; group IV: APA 50 μm glass bead particles before sintering; and group V: APA ceramic powder before sintering. Specimens were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM), X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses, and tested for shear bond strength (SBS). Data were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc tests for multiple comparisons Tukey's test (α ≥ 0.05). Results Air abrasion before sintering significantly increased the surface roughness when compared with groups I and III. The highest tetragonal to monoclinic (t-m) phase transformation (0.07%) was observed in group III, and a reverse transformation was observed in presintered groups (0.01%). Regarding bond strength, there was a significant difference between APA procedures pre- and postsintering. Conclusion Air abrasion before sintering is a valuable method for increasing surface roughness and SBS. The abrasive particles’ size and type used before sintering had a little effect on phase transformation. Clinical significance Air abrasion before sintering could be supposed to be an alternative surface treatment method to air abrasion after sintering. How to cite this article Skienhe H, Habchi R, Ounsi HF, Ferrari M, Salameh Z. Structural and Morphological Evaluation of Presintered Zirconia following Different Surface Treatments. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018;19(2):156-165.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Compressive Bond Strength between Acrylic Denture Base and Teeth with Various Combinations of Mechanical and Chemical Treatments

Coatings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 1527
Author(s):  
Mohammed E. Sayed ◽  
Honey Lunkad ◽  
Ibrahim Fageeh ◽  
Mahdi Jaafari ◽  
Ali Tawhari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Acid Etching ◽  
Manufacturing Companies ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Chemical Surface ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Base Resin ◽  
Denture Base Resin

Debonding and detachment of artificial teeth from the denture base is frequently encountered in prosthodontic practice. This study aims to assess the effect of modifications in the ridge-lap surface of denture teeth with various combinations of mechanical and chemical surface treatments with hydrofluoric acid on bond strength with the acrylic denture base resin and to identify the failure modes (adhesive, cohesive, or mixed). Seventy acrylic resin teeth samples were randomly divided into seven groups (n = 10): a control group (unmodified) and six treatment groups, in which various combinations of mechanical and chemical surface treatments were performed. Then, these teeth were attached to a heat-cured denture base resin block at 45° angulation. The acrylized test samples were thermocycled, and the compressive bond strength was evaluated using a universal mechanical testing machine. The results suggest that roughening with diamond burs yields the highest bond strength, whereas etching/grooving and air abrasion result in the lowest bond strength. Acid etching complemented air abrasion to improve bond strength, while negative effects were noted with acid etching in other groups. Furthermore, roughening at the neck portion of the acrylic teeth can be used by the manufacturing companies as a standard to provide higher bond strength while maintaining the esthetics of the anterior teeth.

scholarly journals Efficiency of treatment and use of a MDP-primer on the bond strentgh of zirconia-cement interface

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e20910511337
Author(s):  
Mirko Dennys Ayala Perez ◽  
Renato Pichini de Oliveira ◽  
Fernando Maeda ◽  
Walter Gomes Miranda-Jr ◽  
Angelica Castro Pimentel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Test ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
The Other ◽  
Cement Interface ◽  
Universal Testing

In order to improve the adhesion between cement and zirconia, aluminum oxide sandblasting (JAT) and Rocatec, sandblasting with silica coated aluminum oxide (ROC), also the primer Signum Zirconia Bond (SZB) were used. The objective of the study was to verify the influence of the surface treatment and the presence of SZB primer in relation to the bond strength between cement and zirconia, using 60 zirconia specimens measuring 7 mm in length, 7 mm in width and 3 mm in length. thickness. Three surface treatments were evaluated: sandblasting with pre-sintering aluminum oxide (OPre), Rocatec Soft before (RPre) and zirconia final sintering (RPos), and also, regarding the presence or not of SZB. All specimens were cemented with Panavia F. The bond strength (RU) was evaluated through a shear test with a standardization device from SDI (Southern Dental Industrie) on a universal testing machine (Kratos), with a speed of 0 , 5 mm / min. The data were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis / Mann-Whitney (α = 0.05). Average (SD) of UK without the use of SZB: OPre: 5.5 (0.9) Ba; RPre: 4.0 (1.4) Bb; RPos: 5.0 (0.5) Bab. Average (SD) of UK using SZB: OPre: 7.9 (1.5) Aab; RPre: 6.7 (2.3) Ab; RPos: 9.0 (1.2) Aa. The use of primer increased the cement / zirconia bond strength regardless of the surface treatment performed, in addition, the Rocatec group after sintering with primer, obtained higher bond strength values ​​compared to the other study groups.

scholarly journals Comparison of Silane Heat Treatment by Laser and Various Surface Treatments on Microtensile Bond Strength of Composite Resin/Lithium Disilicate

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (24) ◽  
pp. 7808
Author(s):  
Goknil Ergun-Kunt ◽  
Rafat Sasany ◽  
Mehmet Faruk Koca ◽  
Mutlu Özcan
Keyword(s):  
Heat Treatment ◽  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Composite Ceramic ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength

In the current study, we evaluated the effects of heat treatment (by Er:YAG or furnace) and various surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of silanized lithium disilicate ceramic. Seventy lithium disilicate (IPS e. max Press; Ivoclar Vivadent) and composite resin (Tetric N-Ceram; Ivoclar Vivadent) blocks were made and distributed into seven groups (n = 10) at random: S: silanization alone; ALS: airborne particle abrasion (APA) and silanization; SC: APA modified with silica and silanization; SHT1: silanization and heat treatment by Er:YAG; SHT2: silanization and heat treatment performed in the furnace (100 °C, 1 min); HF: etching with HF; and HFS: etching with HF and silanization. Every ceramic specimen was cemented to a composite resin block after surface treatment. Cemented specimens were embedded into acrylic resin and were tested with the μTBS test. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tamhane T2 tests (α = 0.05). The SHT1 group had the highest bond of strength compared to the other groups (27.46 MPa). The ALS group had the lowest strength of the groups (15.56 MPa). Between SHT2 and HFS (p = 1), the comparison of the mean µTBS values showed no significant differences. It was concluded that silane heat treatment increased the resin composite–ceramic bond strength; however, within the terms of μTBS, the Er:YAG laser treatment was more successful than other surface treatment applications.

scholarly journals Effect of mechanical and chemical surface treatment on bond strength of acrylic denture teeth to heat cure acrylic resin-an invitro study

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-168
Author(s):  
Mrinali Maria Viegas ◽  
Vidya S Bhat ◽  
Sanath Kumar Shetty
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Visual Analysis ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Quick Method ◽  
Denture Base ◽  
Heat Cure ◽  
Denture Teeth ◽  
Mechanical Surface

Debonding of denture teeth from the denture base has posed a great problem to the clinician and patient. Chemical and mechanical treatments have been performed separately, but there are no studies performed using the combination of chemical and mechanical surface treatments. This study aims at evaluating and comparing the bond strength by using chemical and mechanical surface treatments.60 maxillary right central incisor teeth were used in 5 groups for surface treatment on the ridge lap area: 1 untreated, 2-sandblasting, group 3- Heat cure monomer, 4- sandblasting+ monomer, 5- Dichloromethane. The acrylic teeth were attached to a wax block at an angle of 45º. These were flasked and dewaxed, followed by surface treatment and acrylisation. All cured specimens were loaded under a universal testing machine on the palatal surface at a cross head speed of 1mm/min till fracture occurred. Data obtained was statistically evaluated by one way ANOVA. Surface treatment with dichloromethane showed the highest bond strength of acrylic teeth to heat cure denture base when compared with sandblasting and monomer application. On visual analysis of the fractured specimens, maximum amount of cohesive failures were noticed in the dichloromethane group.Dicholoromethane can be used as an effective and quick method to improve the bonding of acrylic teeth to denture base.

Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, Air Abrasion, and Silane Application on Repaired Shear Bond Strength of Composites

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. E58-E66 ◽  
Author(s):  
SD Cho ◽  
P Rajitrangson ◽  
BA Matis ◽  
JA Platt
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Aluminum Oxide ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Silica Coating ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Air Abrasion

SUMMARY Aged resin composites have a limited number of carbon-carbon double bonds to adhere to a new layer of resin. Study objectives were to 1) evaluate various surface treatments on repaired shear bond strength between aged and new resin composites and 2) to assess the influence of a silane coupling agent after surface treatments. Methods Eighty disk-shape resin composite specimens were fabricated and thermocycled 5000 times prior to surface treatment. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of the three surface treatment groups (n=20): 1) air abrasion with 50-μm aluminum oxide, 2) tribochemical silica coating (CoJet), or 3) Er,Cr:YSGG (erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet) laser or to a no-treatment control group (n=20). Specimens were etched with 35% phosphoric acid, rinsed, and dried. Each group was divided into two subgroups (n=10): A) no silanization and B) with silanization. The adhesive agent was applied and new resin composite was bonded to each conditioned surface. Shear bond strength was evaluated and data analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results Air abrasion with 50-μm aluminum oxide showed significantly higher repair bond strength than the Er,Cr:YSGG laser and control groups. Air abrasion with 50-μm aluminum oxide was not significantly different from tribochemical silica coating. Tribochemical silica coating had significantly higher repair bond strength than Er,Cr:YSGG laser and the control. Er,Cr:YSGG laser and the control did not have significantly different repair bond strengths. Silanization had no influence on repair bond strength for any of the surface treatment methods. Conclusion Air abrasion with 50-μm aluminum oxide and tribochemical silica followed by the application of bonding agent provided the highest repair shear bond strength values, suggesting that they might be adequate methods to improve the quality of repairs of resin composites.

scholarly journals Resin Bonding to a Hybrid Ceramic: Effects of Surface Treatments and Aging

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Campos ◽  
CS Almeida ◽  
MP Rippe ◽  
RM de Melo ◽  
LF Valandro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Hydrofluoric Acid ◽  
Surface Treatments ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Air Abrasion ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Cont Group ◽  
Hybrid Ceramic

SUMMARY The aim of this study was to verify the effects of different surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength between resin cement and a hybrid ceramic. Thirty-two hybrid ceramic slices (8 × 10 × 3 mm) were produced and allocated among four groups according to the surface treatment: Cont = no treatment, HA = 10% hydrofluoric acid applied for 60 seconds, PA = 37% phosphoric acid applied for 60 seconds and CJ = air abrasion with silica particle coated alumina (Cojet Sand, 3M ESPE, 30 μm/2.8 bar). As a control group, eight blocks of feldspathic ceramic (8 × 10 × 3 mm) were etched by hydrofluoric acid for 60 seconds (VMII). After the surface treatments, the ceramic slices were silanized (except the Cont group) and adhesively cemented to composite resin blocks (8 × 10 × 3 mm ) with a load of 750 g (polymerized for 40 seconds each side). The cemented blocks were cut into beams (bonded surface area of ∼1 mm2). Half of the beams were aged (thermocycling of 5°C-55°C/6000 cycles + water storage at 37°C/60 days), and the other half were tested immediately after being cut. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (non-aged groups) and by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test (aged groups; α=0.05%). The mode of failure was classified by stereomicroscopy. The surface treatment significantly affected the bond strength in each set of groups: non-aged (p=0.001) and aged (p=0.001). Before being aged, samples in the CJ, HA, and PA groups achieved the highest bond strength values. However, after being aged, only those in the HA group remained with the highest bond strength values. Adhesive failure was found most often. In conclusion, hydrofluoric acid etching should be used for surface conditioning of the studied hybrid ceramic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document