Microtensile Bond Strength of CAD-CAM Restorative Dental Material Blocks to Resin Cement: An In Vitro Study

Today's dentistry frequently employs bonded partial restorations, which are usually fabricated in ceramic materials. In the last decade, hybrid materials have emerged that attempt to combine the properties of composites and ceramics. To evaluate in vitro, by means of a microtensile test, the bo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Materials 2023-07, Vol.16 (13), p.4796
Main Authors: González-Angulo, Eva, Fernández-Estevan, Lucía, Casas-Terrón, Javier, Senent-Vicente, Gisela, Fons-Badal, Carla, García-Sala Bonmatí, Fernando, Agustín-Panadero, Rubén, Román-Rodríguez, Juan Luis
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bond strength
Bonding strength
CAD/CAM
Cement
Ceramic materials
Ceramics
Dental cement
Dental materials
Fractures
Hypotheses
Lithium
Manufacturers
Optical microscopy
Resins
Sandblasting
Silica
Silicon dioxide
Variance analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Today's dentistry frequently employs bonded partial restorations, which are usually fabricated in ceramic materials. In the last decade, hybrid materials have emerged that attempt to combine the properties of composites and ceramics. To evaluate in vitro, by means of a microtensile test, the bond strength between CAD-CAM restorative materials and the cement recommended by their manufacturer. From blocks of CAD-CAM restorative material bonded to composite blocks (Filtek 500 ), beams with a bonding area of approximately 1 mm were made and divided into four groups: EMAX (IPS e.max CAD lithium disilicate), VE (VITA Enamic polymer-infiltrated ceramic matrix), LUA (Lava Ultimate nano-ceramic resin with sandblasting protocol) and LUS (Lava Ultimate nano-ceramic resin with silica coating protocol). In each group, perimeter (external) or central (internal) beams were differentiated according to the position in the block. The samples were tested on the LMT 100 microtensile machine. Using optical microscopy, the fractures were categorized as adhesive or cohesive (of the restorative material or composite), and the data were analysed with parametric tests (ANOVA). The LUS group had the highest results (42 ± 20 MPa), followed by the LUA group (38 ± 18 MPa). EMAX had a mean of 34 ± 16 MPa, and VE was the lowest in this study (30 ± 17 MPa). In all groups, the central beams performed better than the perimeter beams. Both EMAX and VE had the most adhesive fractures, while LUA and LUS had a predominance of cohesive fractures. Lava Ultimate nanoceramic resin with the silica coating protocol obtains the best bond strength values.
ISSN:1996-1944
1996-1944
DOI:10.3390/ma16134796