The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 9 ( September, 2019 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Influence of Different Luting Cements on the Shear Bond Strength of Pretreated Lithium Disilicate Materials

Mohammed Alkhurays

Keywords : Adhesion, Lithium disilicate, Luting, Microetching, Resin cements

Citation Information : Alkhurays M. Influence of Different Luting Cements on the Shear Bond Strength of Pretreated Lithium Disilicate Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (9):1056-1060.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2641

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aims: The aim of the study was to examine the shear bond strength of different luting cements bonding to pre-treated lithium disilicate materials. Materials and methods: Sixty A2 shade lithium disilicate discs were subjected to either micro-etch with aluminum trioxide and etching by 10% hydrofluoric acid (micro-etch group; n = 30); or etching with 10% hydrofluoric acid (acid-etch group; n = 30) before cementation. Three dual-cure Variolink Esthetic (VDC), RelyX Ultimate (RUT), and RelyX Unicem (RUC) and three light-cure Variolink Veneer (VV), Variolink Esthetic (VLE), RelyX Veneer (RV) resin cements were used for cementation. The specimens from each group were tested for shear bond strength (SBS). The data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA; p < 0.05 is considered statistically significant. Results: For all resin cements tested with different surface treatments, there was a statistically significant difference within resin cements per surface treatment (p < 0.05). The SBS in the micro-etch group was significantly higher across all the cements tested when compared to the acid-etch group (p < 0.05), thus suggesting that surface treatment affects the SBS largely irrespective of the resin cement. Their interaction between cement and the surface treatment was significantly different across groups (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Under the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that surface treatment influences the bond strength irrespective of the resin cement (light/dual-cure) used for indirect restorations’ cementation. The shear bond strength in the sand blast/acid etch group was significantly higher across all the cements tested when compared to the acid-etch alone. Clinical significance: The surface treatment of porcelain veneer hugely influence the SBS, which will directly affect the veneer clinical success rate. The micro-etching recorded a higher shear bond strength when compared to those with acid-etch only.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Porcelain veneers: a review of the literature. J Dent 2000;28(3):163–177. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00066-4.
  2. Kumbuloglu O, Lassila LV, et al. Shear bond strength of composite resin cements to lithium disilicate ceramics. J Oral Rehab 2005;32(2): 128–133. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01400.x.
  3. Braga RR, Ballester RY, et al. Pilot study on the early shear strength of porcelain-dentin bonding using dual-cure cements. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81(3):285–289. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70270-2.
  4. Altintas S, Eldeniz AU, et al. Shear bond strength of four resin cements used to lute ceramic core material to human dentin. J Prosthodont 2008;17(8):634–640. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00348.x.
  5. Marocho SM, Özcan M, et al. Effect of seating forces on cement–ceramic adhesion in microtensile bond tests. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(1):325–331. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0668-y.
  6. Burrow MF, Inokoshi S, et al. Water sorption of several bonding resins. Ame J Dent 1999;12(6):295–298.
  7. Tay FR, Hashimoto M, et al. Aging affects two modes of nanoleakage expression in bonded dentin. J Dent Res 2003;82(7):537–541. DOI: 10.1177/154405910308200710.
  8. Mohammed-Salih HS. The effect of thermocycling and debonding time on the shear bond strength of different orthodontic brackets bonded with light-emitting diode adhesive (In vitro study). J Baghdad Coll Dent 2013;25(1):139–145. DOI: 10.12816/0014977.
  9. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, et al. Porcelain veneers bonded to tooth structure: an ultra-morphological FE-SEM examination of the adhesive interface. Dent Mater 1999;15(2):105–119. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00020-2.
  10. Friedman MJ. A 15-year review of porcelain veneer failure--a clinician's observations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998;19(6): 625–628.
  11. Christensen GJ, Christensen RP. Clinical observations of porcelain veneers: a three-year report. J Esthet Dent 1991;3(5):174–179. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1991.tb00994.x.
  12. Schneider R, de Goes MF, et al. Tensile bond strength of dual curing resin-based cements to commercially pure titanium. Dent Mater 2007;23(1):81–87. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.12.006.
  13. Dérand MT. Shear stresses in the adhesive layer under porcelain veneers: A finite element method study. Acta Odontol Scand 1998;56(5):257–262. DOI: 10.1080/000163598428419.
  14. Shimada Y, Yamaguchi S, et al. Micro-shear bond strength of dual-cured resin cement to glass ceramics. Dent Mater 2002;18(5):380–388. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(01)00054-9.
  15. Stewart GP, Jain P, et al. Shear bond strength of resin cements to both ceramic and dentin. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88(3):277–284. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2002.128034.
  16. Kitasako Y, Burrow MF, et al. Shear bond strengths of three resin cements to dentine over 3 years in vitro. J Dent 2001;29(2):139–144. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00058-0.
  17. Hitz T, Stawarczyk B, et al. Are self-adhesive resin cements a valid alternative to conventional resin cements? A laboratory study of the long-term bond strength. Dent Mater 2012;28(11):1183–1190. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.09.006.
  18. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, et al. Dental luting agents: a review of the current literature. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80(3):280–301. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70128-3.
  19. White SN, Yu Z. Compressive and diametral tensile strengths of current adhesive luting agents. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69(6):568–572. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(93)90283-T.
  20. Radovic I, Monticelli F, et al. Self-adhesive resin cements: a literature review. J Adhes Dent 2008;10(4):251–258.
  21. Aguiar TR, Di Francescantonio M, et al. Effect of curing mode on bond strength of self-adhesive resin luting cements to dentin. J Biomed Mater Res 2010;93(1):122–127. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31566.
  22. Söderholm KJ, Reetz EA. Factors affecting reliability of a resin-based cement joint. Gen Dent 1996;44(4):296–298.
  23. Aykor A, Ozel E. Five-year clinical evaluation of 300 teeth restored with porcelain laminate veneers using total-etch and a modified self-etch adhesive system. Oper Dent 2009;34(5):516–523. DOI: 10.2341/08-038-C.
  24. Erdemir U, Sancakli HS, et al. Shear bond strength of a new self-adhering flowable composite resin for lithium disilicate-reinforced CAD/CAM ceramic material. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6(6):434–443. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.434.
  25. Della Bona A, Van Noort R. Shear vs tensile bond strength of resin composite bonded to ceramic. J Dent Res 1999;74(9):1591–1596. DOI: 10.1177/00220345950740091401.
  26. Zareen SA, Usman JA, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Three Different Luting Cements toward Ceramic and Dentin for All Ceramic Restorations: An in vitro Study. J Orofac Res 2013;3(2):86–89.
  27. Usman JA, Nisha N. Comparing shear bond strength of ceramic and dentine toward three different luting cement for all ceramic restoration. Int J Sci Res Public 2014;4(4):1–4.
  28. Kramer N, Lohbauer U, et al. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations. Am J Dent 2000;13(Spec No. D):60D–76D.
  29. Campos EA, Correr GM, et al. Chlorhexidine diminishes the loss of bond strength over time under simulated pulpal pressure and thermo-mechanical stressing. J Dent 2009;37(2):108–114. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.10.003.
  30. Roulet JF, Söderholm KJ, et al. Effects of treatment and storage conditions on ceramic/composite bond strength. J Dent Res 1995;74:381–387. DOI: 10.1177/00220345950740011501.
  31. Ozden AN, Akaltan F, et al. Effect of surface treatments of porcelain on the shear bond strength of applied dual-cured cement. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:85–88. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(94)90216-X.
  32. Thurmond JW, Barkmeier WW, et al. Effect of porcelain surface treatments on bond strengths of composite resin bonded to porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 1994;72:355–359. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(94)90553-3.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.