Concepedia

Publication | Closed Access

Repair bond strength and surface topography of resin‐ceramic and ceramic restorative blocks treated by laser and conventional surface treatments

27

Citations

53

References

2020

Year

Abstract

This study intended to compare the repair bond strength of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks consisting of resin and feldspathic ceramics following different surface treatments using the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Ten specimens were prepared with 4 mm height for Vita Enamic (VE), Lava Ultimate (LU), Vita Mark II (VM), and thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55°C). Each material was categorized into one of five subgroups according to following surface treatments: (a) bur grinding (BG), (b) hydrofluoric acid etching (HF), (c) neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG or NY), (d) erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG or EY), and (e) erbium, chromium-doped yttrium, scandium, gallium, and garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG or ECY) laser conditioning. After surface treatment procedures, specimens were properly restored to 4 mm high with a micro-hybrid composite resin. Bar specimens (1 × 1 × 8 mm) were obtained using a low-speed cutting machine and then thermocycled (10,000 cycle, 5-55°C). The μTBS was tested at 1 mm/min crosshead speed, and failure modes were evaluated. Data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. LU-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (32.94 ± 5.80 MPa) compared to LU-laser groups (p < .05). VE-BG showed significantly higher μTBS (22.06 ± 4.26 MPa) compared to other VE groups (p < .05). Among the laser groups, the NY laser produced the lowest (p < .05) μTBS for LU (13.42 ± 3.44 MPa) and VE (2.27 ± 0.85 MPa), while EY showed the highest (p < .05). Laser-treated VM groups were all prefailured. VM-HF produced a higher μTBS (18.73 ± 3.75 MPa) than VM-BG (5.05 ± 1.76 MPa) (p < .05).

References

YearCitations

Page 1