The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effect of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength to Turkom-Cera All-ceramic Material

Bandar MA Al-Makramani, Fuad A Al-Sanabani, Abdul AA Razak, Mohamed I Abu-Hassan, Ibrahim Z AL-Shami, Hosain M Almansour

Citation Information : Al-Makramani BM, Al-Sanabani FA, Razak AA, Abu-Hassan MI, AL-Shami IZ, Almansour HM. Effect of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength to Turkom-Cera All-ceramic Material. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (11):920-925.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1954

Published Online: 01-11-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength (SBS) of Turkom-Cera (Turkom-Ceramic (M) Sdn. Bhd., Puchong, Malaysia) all-ceramic material cemented with resin cement Panavia-F (Kuraray Medical Inc., Okayama, Japan).

Materials and methods

Forty Turkom-Cera ceramic disks (10 mm × 3 mm) were prepared and randomly divided into four groups. The disks were wet ground to 1000-grit and subjected to four surface treatments: (1) No treatment (Control), (2) sandblasting, (3) silane application, and (4) sandblasting + silane. The four groups of 10 specimens each were bonded with Panavia-F resin cement according to manufacturer's recommendations. The SBS was determined using the universal testing machine (Instron) at 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed. Failure modes were recorded and a qualitative micromorphologic examination of different surface treatments was performed. The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) tests.

Results

The SBS of the control, sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups were: 10.8 ± 1.5, 16.4 ± 3.4, 16.2 ± 2.5, and 19.1 ± 2.4 MPa respectively. According to the Tukey HSD test, only the mean SBS of the control group was significantly different from the other three groups. There was no significant difference between sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups.

Conclusion

In this study, the three surface treatments used improved the bond strength of resin cement to Turkom-Cera disks.

Clinical significance

The surface treatments used in this study appeared to be suitable methods for the cementation of glass infiltrated all-ceramic restorations.

How to cite this article

Razak AAA, Abu-Hassan MI, AL-Makramani BMA, AL-Sanabani FA, AL-Shami IZ, Almansour HM. Effect of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength to Turkom-Cera All-Ceramic Material. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(11):920-925.


PDF Share
  1. Effect of luting cements on the compressive strength of Turkom- Cera™ all-ceramic copings. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 Feb;19(2):33-40.
  2. Critical appraisal. Resin bond to dental ceramics, Part II: high-strength ceramics. J Esthet Restor Dent 2004 Sep;16(5):324-328.
  3. Bonding to glass infiltrated alumina ceramics: adhesive methods and their durability. J Prosthet Dent 1995 Mar;73(3):240-249.
  4. Resin bond strength to densely sintered alumina ceramic. Int J Prosthodont 2002 Jul-Aug;15(4):333-338.
  5. A new adhesive technology for all-ceramics. Dent Mate 2003 Sep;19(6):567-573.
  6. Bond strength of a resin cement to high-alumina and zirconia-reinforced ceramics: the effect of surface conditioning. J Adhes Dent 2006 Jun;8(3):175-181.
  7. Effect of different ceramic surface treatments on resin microtensile bond strength. J Prosthodont 2004 Mar;13(1):28-35.
  8. Effect of surface treatment on the shear bond strength of a resin-based cement to porcelain. Braz Dent J 2006 Jul-Aug;17(4):290-295.
  9. Selection of luting agents: part 2. J Calif Dent Assoc 2006 Feb;34(2):161-166.
  10. Bonding of resin composites to etchable ceramic surfaces – an insight review of the chemical aspects on surface conditioning. J Oral Rehabil 2007 Aug;34(8):622-630.
  11. A new all-ceramic crown – a densesintered, high purity alumina coping with porcelain. Acta Odontol Scand 1993 Feb;51(1):59-64.
  12. The effect of surface treatment on the shear bond strength of luting cement to a glass-infiltrated alumina ceramic. Int J Prosthodont 2001 Jul-Aug;14(4):335-339.
  13. Effect of surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of luting cement to ceramics. Dental Mater 2003 Dec;19(8):725-731.
  14. ISO standard. 11405: 2003. Dental materials – testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Geneva: ISO/TS; 2003.
  15. Effects of surface treatments on shear bond strengths between a resin cement and an alumina core. J Prosthet Dent 2000 Jun;83(6):644-647.
  16. Shear bond strength of a resin cement to densely sintered high-purity alumina with various surface conditions. Acta Odontol Scand 1998 Feb;56(1):9-13.
  17. Effect of various surface conditioning methods on the adhesion of dual-cure resin cement with MDP functional monomer to zirconia after thermal aging. Dent Mater J 2008 Jan;27(1):99-104.
  18. Resin ceramic bonding: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2003 Mar;89(3):268-274.
  19. Shear bond strength of different types of luting cements to an aluminum oxide-reinforced glass ceramic core material. Dent Mater 2004 Dec;20(10):901-907.
  20. Durability of the resin bond strength to the alumina ceramic Procera. Dent Mater 2004 Jun;20(5):498-508.
  21. Improved bonding of adhesive resin to sintered porcelain with the combination of acid etching and a two-liquid silane conditioner. J Oral Rehabil 2001 Jan;28(1):102-108.
  22. Micro-shear bond strength of dual-cured resin cement to glass ceramics. Dent Mater 2002 Jul;18(5):380-388.
  23. In vitro evaluation of long-term bonding of Procera AllCeram alumina restorations with a modified resin luting agent. J Prosthet Dent 2003 Apr;89(4):381-387.
  24. The effect of adhesives with various degrees of hydrophilicity on resin ceramic bonding durability. Dent Mater 2004 Oct;20(8):778-787.
  25. Long-term resin bond to densely sintered aluminum oxide ceramic. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003 Nov;15(6):362-368; discussion 369.
  26. Bonding between resin luting cement and glass infiltrated aluminareinforced ceramics with silane coupling agent. J Oral Rehabil 2004 Aug;31(8):785-789.
  27. Bonding of dual-cured resin cement to zirconia ceramic using phosphate acid ester monomer and zirconate coupler. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006 Apr;77(1):28-33.
  28. Shear bond strength of resin luting cement to glass-infiltrated porous aluminum oxide cores. J Prosthet Dent 2000 Feb;83(2):210-215.
  29. Bonding strengths of porcelain repair systems with various surface treatments. J Prosthet Dent 1997 Sep;78(3):267-274.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.