Abstract
Objetive: The purpose of this study is was to evaluate the influence of sandblasting ceramic and enamel structure on bond strength, changing distance.Material and methods: 60 third molars , were selected, enamel surfaces were ground flat with wet 600 - 2000 grit aluminum oxide abrasive papers and polished with three, one, and one-fourth micrometer-grit diamond pastes. Obtained 120 lithium disilicate-based core ceramic discs ( 2 mm diameter;1 mm thickness), divided into 7 groups [Group C, don’t sandblasting, Group SB-E(5-10) enamel sandblasting 5 and 10 mm, Group SB-C(5-10) ceramic sandblasting 5 mm and 10 mm, Group SB-EC(5-10) enamel and ceramic sandblasting 5 mm and 10 mm] after was performed microshear and Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM), Statistic Teste of normality , after one-way ANOVA and Tukey test (?: 0.05).Results: The group C present bond strength (59.2±12.5), the group SB-E 5 mm (21.7±08.8) (p<0.005), the group SB-E10 (53.6±14.3).Conclusion: The use of sandblasting treatment of the enamel surface a 5 mm by 20 seconds decreases the bonding strength to microshear.
Highlights
Restorative dentistry faces new challenges in adopting emerging technologies related to dental materials and to meeting patients’ demands for esthetic non metallic restoration
Glass ceramic inlay techniques have some advantages such as satisfactory physicochemical properties, abrasion resistance, and color retention compared to composite resins that lead to some problems when used in stressbearing areas of the mouth [1]
Bond strength values significantly reduced when sandblasting of enamelwas performed at 5 mm distance (p < 0.05), andincreased slightly, not significant, when done in ceramic sandblasting
Summary
Restorative dentistry faces new challenges in adopting emerging technologies related to dental materials and to meeting patients’ demands for esthetic non metallic restoration. Available choices of nonmetallic materials for such restorations include direct and indirect resin composite, porcelain or ceramic. Among these materials, glass ceramic inlay techniques have some advantages such as satisfactory physicochemical properties, abrasion resistance, and color retention compared to composite resins that lead to some problems when used in stressbearing areas of the mouth [1]. IPS Empress 2 (IvoclarVivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) glass ceramic is a heat-pressed, lithium disilicate– reinforced ceramic. This all-ceramic material has been introduced for single restorations as well as for three-unit fixed partial dentures in the anterior region, possibly extending to the second premolar. The final restoration, made oflithium disilicate–framework ceramic, offers clinical benefits in terms ofadaptability, polish surface, and reduced wear of opposing tooth structure, with the advantages of increased biocompatibility, natural appearance, and superior esthetics [2, 3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
