Influence Of Cleaning Methods Research Articles

Repair bond strength of composite resin to CAD/CAM glass-ceramic: influence of cleaning methods, surface treatments, and aging.

To evaluate the influence of different cleaning methods, surface treatments, and aging on the repair bond strength to a CAD/CAM glass-ceramic. Forty-eight lithium disilicate CAD/CAM ceramic blocks were fabricated, sintered, and embedded in acrylic resin. After contamination with human saliva, they were divided according to the factors "Cleaning method" (Control-water/air spray, Air-particle abrasion with Al2O3, Ivoclean cleaning paste), "Surface treatment" (5% Hydrofluoric acid-HF + Silane, Monobond Etch & Prime-MEP), and "Aging" (thermocycling, no thermocycling). Cylinders of composite resin were built, and Shear Bond Strength (SBS) was tested. Data were analyzed with 3-way ANOVA, Tukey's post-test, and Weibull modulus and failure analyses and Scanning Electron Microscopy of the surfaces were performed. Significant factors affecting SBS were cleaning method and aging. Surface treatment had an influence but was not statistically significant (p=0.0591). The IMEP (11.10±2.90A), APHF (9.78±2.13AB) and IHF (9.61±2.20AB) groups presented the highest SBS values, which were statistically superior to the IMEPTC (5.36±1.17F), IHFTC (5.52±1.71EF), APHFTC (5.80±1.20DEF), HFTC (5.82±1.33DEF), MEPTC (5.92±1.82DEF) and HF (6.62±1.77CDEF) groups. Weibull analysis showed no significance (p=0.096), but characteristic strength was. Failure analysis revealed a predominance of mixed type 1 failure (adhesive and cohesive resin). Air-particle abrasion with Al2O3 and Ivoclean improved SBS compared to the control group and MEP showed similar results to HF + Silane, making it a viable alternative for glass-ceramic repair. Moreover, thermocycling reduced the bond strength compared to the groups without aging, with the effect being more pronounced in the groups treated with HF followed by silane. Lithium disilicate ceramic repair with composite resin is more effective when the ceramic is first decontaminated using a cleaning agent or air-particle abrasion. For conditioning, either MEP or HF followed by silane can be used; however, MEP presents lower toxicity.

Influence of Cleaning Methods on Resin Bonding to Contaminated Translucent 3Y-TZP ceramic.

To evaluate the influence of different cleaning methods on the resin bond strength to contaminated translucent 3Y-TZP ceramic. A total of 133 airborne-particle abraded (0.1 MPa) zirconia specimens were divided into 7 groups. Uncontaminated zirconia specimens were either not cleaned (UN) or cleaned with cleaning paste (Ivoclean) (UP1). After contamination by saliva and blood immersion, zirconia specimens were cleaned using either distilled water rinsing (CW), 99% isopropanol in an ultrasonic bath (CI), cleaning paste according to manufacturer's instructions (CP1), cleaning paste with additional rubbing (CP2), or additional airborne-particle abrasion at 0.1 MPa (CA). Three specimens from each group were examined by x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). For each group, sixteen Plexiglas tubes filled with composite resin (Clearfil FII, Kuraray Noritake) were bonded to the zirconia specimens using a primer (Clearfil Ceramic Primer Plus, Kuraray Noritake) and luting composite (Panavia V5, Kuraray Noritake). Before measuring tensile bond strength, specimens were stored in distilled water for 3 or 150 days plus 37,500 thermal cycles. After 3 days, no group showed significantly different TBS compared to the control group UN (p > 0.05). However, groups CW and CI showed significantly lower TBS than all other groups after 150 days (p ≤ 0.05). XPS analysis revealed more organic residue on zirconia surfaces of groups CW and CI than on the other groups. Cleaning with the cleaning paste and airborne-particle abrasion were effective in removing saliva and blood contamination and enhancing bond strength.

Influence of cleaning methods on the bond strength of resin cement to saliva-contaminated lithium disilicate ceramic.

The aim of the present study was to examine the influence of different cleaning methods on the bond strength of resin cement to saliva-contaminated lithium disilicate ceramic. Lithium disilicate ceramic specimens (n = 8/group) were etched with 5% hydrofluoric acid (HF) to comprise the control group. After or before saliva contamination, specimens were cleaned with one of five methods: rinsing with water-spray (WS), K etchant GEL (PA), Ivoclean (IC), AD Gel (ADG), or application of a silane coupling agent before immersion in saliva (SCA). Stainless steel rods were bonded to the ceramic with resin cement. The tensile bond strength was measured after 24h (TC0) and after thermal cycling at 4-60°C (TC20000). Specimen surfaces were also evaluated using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05). Both the cleaning method (p = 0.0001) and storage condition (p = 0.0001) significantly affected the bond strength results. Before or after TCs, no significant differences in bond strength were observed between the control group and the other cleaning groups except for the WS group, which had a significantly lower bond strength than did the PA, IC, ADG, or SCA groups (p < 0.05). The level of nitrogen in the ADG group was almost equal to that in the control group. WS cleaning did not restore the bond strength of resin cement to saliva-contaminated lithium disilicate ceramic etched with HF, while PA, IC, ADG, and SCA all benefited. Lithium disilicate ceramic restorations etched with HF should to be cleaned with ADG after saliva contamination.

Influence of cleaning methods on resin bonding to saliva-contaminated zirconia.

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different cleaning methods on the shear bond strengths of 2 resin cements to saliva-contaminated zirconia. After saliva contamination, alumina-blasted zirconia specimens were cleaned with 1 of 5 methods of water-rinsing (SA), K-etchant GEL phosphoric acid (PA), Ivoclean (IC), AD Gel (ADG), or additional alumina-blasting (AB). Alumina-blasted zirconia without saliva contamination was used as control group (Cont). Composite cylinders were bonded to the zirconia with 1 of 2 dual-cured resin cements. The bond strengths were measured by shear testing after 24 hours (TC0) and after thermal cycling at 4°C-60°C (TC10000) and specimen surfaces were evaluated using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). Data were statistically analyzed using 3-way analysis of variance and Tukey test (α = 0.05). There were no significant differences in the bond strengths of 2 resin cements between the Cont ADG, and AB groups before and after TCs (P > .05). SA, PA, and IC groups did not exhibit durable resin bonding to zirconia. XPS showed that carbon and nitrogen increased in the SA group in comparison to the Cont group. The concentration of carbon in other 4 groups returned to the concentration range of the Cont group; however, nitrogen was not detected in the only AB group. Saliva contamination significantly reduced the bond strength of 2 resin cements to zirconia. Additional AB or cleaning with ADG resulted in effective cleaning of saliva contamination and preserved resin cement bond strength to zirconia. Saliva contamination occurs during clinical procedures for adjustment of zirconia ceramic restorations in the oral environment. AD Gel application is effective for removing saliva contaminants on the alumina-blasted zirconia surface beforehand by the dental laboratory instead of additional AB since AD Gel application and AB had a similar effect on the removal of organic components of saliva.