Abstract
Objective The study aimed to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDGC) and resin cement (RC) using different surface treatments. Materials and Methods LDGC blocks (Vintage LD Press) were prepared, etched with 4.5% hydrofluoric acid, and randomly divided into seven groups ( n = 10), depending on the surface treatments. The groups were divided as follows: 1) no surface treatment (control), 2) Silane Primer (KS), 3) Signum Ceramic Bond I (SGI), 4) Signum Ceramic Bond I/Signum Ceramic Bond II (SGI/SGII), 5) experimental silane (EXP), 6) experimental silane/Signum Ceramic Bond II (EXP/SGII), and 7) experimental silane/Adper Scotchbond Multi-purpose Adhesive (EXP/ADP). The specimens were cemented to resin composite blocks with resin cement and stored in water at 37 °C for 24 hours. The specimens underwent 5,000 thermal cycles and were subjected to the SBS test. Mode of failure was evaluated under the stereo microscope. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed with Welch ANOVA and Games-Howell post hoc tests (α = 0.05). Results The highest mean SBS showed in group EXP/ADP (45.49 ± 3.37 MPa); however, this was not significantly different from group EXP/SGII (41.38 ± 2.17 MPa) ( p ≥ 0.05). The lowest SBS was shown in the control group (18.36 ± 0.69 MPa). This was not significantly different from group KS (20.17 ± 1.10 MPa) ( p ≥ 0.05). Conclusions The different surface treatments significantly affected the SBS value between LDGC and RC. The application of pure silane coupling agent with or without the application of an adhesive improved the SBS value and bond quality.
Highlights
As dental materials have improved, patients have tended to demand esthetics and metal-free restorations
When less than 40% of the resin cement (RC) could be observed on the surface of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDGC), it was categorized as an adhesive failure (AF), meaning that there is no bond between LDGC and RC
When more than 40% but less than 60% of the RC could be observed on the surface of LDGC, it was categorized as a mixed failure (MF), meaning that it has both adhesive and cohesive failures
Summary
As dental materials have improved, patients have tended to demand esthetics and metal-free restorations. The successful clinical application of all-ceramic materials depends on the clinicians’ ability to develop the appropriate treatment plans. They must carefully choose the appropriate material and cementation protocol to fulfill the patients’ needs and expectations. Lithium disilicate restorations are usually monolithic, in which the full contour of the prosthesis is fabricated from a homogeneous single material. It has translucency, opalescence, and light diffusion that can be stained, glazed, or cut back to layer veneering porcelain to enhancing incisal characterization. Lithium disilicate can be used for inlays, onlays, three-quarter crowns, full-coverage crowns, and short-span bridges in the anterior region.[2]
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.
