Abstract
BackgroundThus, purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of the resin cement and the resin modified glass ionomer cement on 3D printed temporary material for crowns and bridges in combination with different surface treatment modalities.Material and MethodsTest specimens VarseoSmile Temp material (Bego, Bremen, Germany) (n=64) in the form of rectangular blocks (n=32) and cylindrical test specimens (n=32) were printed using the Varseo S 3D printer (Bego, Bremen, Germany). The specimens were divided into 4 groups, with 8 specimens of each kind. Two groups (n=16 pairs) were blasted with Perlablast® Micro [PM] 50µm (Bego, Bremen, Germany) and two groups (n=16 pairs) were blasted with alumina [AL] 50µm. The cylindric specimen were cemented on the rectangular block with a load of 20N using a Zwick/Roell machine (Ulm, Germany), to ensure a comparable cementing process. One group (n=8) of each pre-treatment was cemented with Fuji Cem 2 [Fuji+AL & Fuji+PM] and one of each with Variolink® Esthetic [Vario+AL & Vario+PM]. The Fuji Cem 2 was chemically cured while dual curing Variolink® Esthetic was additionally light cured using LED (Bluephase II, Ivoclar Vivadent, Ellwagen, Germany; light intensity, >1,000 mW/cm2, high power modus). The shear strength was performed with Zwick/Roell universal test machine (speed, 0.8 mm/min), fracture and statistical analysis was performed (T-test, p<0.05).ResultsT-test showed a significant difference Fuji Cem 2 (Fuji+AL & Fuji&PM) and Variolink® Esthetic (Vario+AL &Vario+PM) (p=0.000). Fuji+AL & Fuji+PM showed a significant difference for surface pre-treatment (p=0.002). Vario+AL & Vario+PM no significance (p=0.872) for pre-treatment method was detectable.ConclusionsVariolink® Esthetic showed a higher bond strength compared to Fuji Cem 2 and an increasing bond strength for Fuji Cem 2 with alumina pre-treatment. There was no significant difference for Vario+AL and Vario+PM. Key words:Shear bond strength, adhesion, adhesive resin cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement, 3D printable materials, mechanical testing, provisional restoration.
Highlights
The advances in dentistry and the positive development of oral hygiene of the most patients have led to a longer maintenance of one’s own teeth and to an increased demand for fixed prosthetic restorations such as crowns and bridges
Blixt et al found that glass ionomer cements have a higher adhesion to aluminium oxide ceramic with previous surface treatment with 110μm alumina particles at 2.8 bar for 13 seconds [5]
Influence cement: The average shear bond strength among all Vario groups was significantly higher than Fuji groups (p
Summary
The advances in dentistry and the positive development of oral hygiene of the most patients have led to a longer maintenance of one’s own teeth and to an increased demand for fixed prosthetic restorations such as crowns and bridges. As 3D printing resin for temporary crowns and bridges have been recently developed, there are only limited data and studies on bond strength of various luting materials or different surface pre-treatments available. The aim of this study was to analyse the shear bond of different materials in connection with different surface pre-treatment on printable crown and bridges materials. Purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of the resin cement and the resin modified glass ionomer cement on 3D printed temporary material for crowns and bridges in combination with different surface treatment modalities. Conclusions: Variolink® Esthetic showed a higher bond strength compared to Fuji Cem 2 and an increasing bond strength for Fuji Cem 2 with alumina pre-treatment.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
