Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2023; 17(03): 809-817
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1756475
Original Article

Effect of Different Surface Treatment Methods on the Shear Bond Strength of Resin Composite/Zirconia for Intra-oral Repair of Zirconia Restorations

Kamyar Fathpour
1   Department of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, Dental Material Research Center, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
,
Mahsa Nili Ahmadabadi
2   Department of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
,
Ramin Atash
3   Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
,
Amir Hossein Fathi
4   Dental Materials Research Center, Dental Prosthodontics Department, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective A durable resin/zirconia bond is essential for successful intra-oral repair of zirconia restorations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of two mechanical treatments followed by seven chemical treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) of composite resin to zirconia.

Materials and Methods In this in vitro study, 280 zirconia blocks (Y-TZP) were either air-abraded or bur roughened and divided into seven experimental groups (n = 20) in terms of primer/resin application: 1) ZPP, Z-Prime Plus; 2) ZPP + GP, Z-Prime Plus followed by G-premio bond; 3) ZPP + ALB, Z-Prime Plus followed by All Bond Universal; 4) ZPP + CLRF, Z-Prime Plus followed by Clearfil SE Bond; 5)GP, G-Premio Bond 6) ALB, All Bond Universal; and 7) CLRF, Clearfil SE Bond. After composite bonding and storage in distilled water (24 hours), half of each group specimen (n = 10) were thermocycled. All specimens were subjected to shear force. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney test (α = 0.05).

Results Significant reduction in SBS was observed in all groups after thermocycling(p < 0.05), except for the air-abraded ZPP + CLRF (p = 0.143). After aging, air-abraded CLRF exhibited the highest SBS (13.55 ± 7.8 MPa) and bur roughened ZPP showed the lowest SBS (1.16 ± 1.23 MPa). In the aged specimens, there was a significant difference between air abrasion and bur roughening in all groups (p < 0.05).

Conclusion Air-abrasion followed by application of adhesive (with/without prior primer application) is the most efficient technique for repair of veneered zirconia restorations with resin composite.

Keywords

zirconium - Clearfil SE bond - shear bond strength


Publication History

Article published online:
11 October 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Libecki W, Elsayed A, Lehmann F, Kern M. Efficacy of different surface treatments for tntraoral repair of veneered zirconia frameworks. J Adhes Dent 2017; 19 (04) 323-329
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Kelly JR, Benetti P. Ceramic materials in dentistry: historical evolution and current practice. Aust Dent J 2011; 56 (Suppl 1): 84-96
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Peampring C, Kengtanyakich S. Surface roughness and translucency of various translucent zirconia ceramics after hydrothermal aging. Eur J Dent 2022; 16 (04) 761-767
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Subaşı MG, İnan Ö. Evaluation of the topographical surface changes and roughness of zirconia after different surface treatments. Lasers Med Sci 2012; 27 (04) 735-742
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Tokar E, Polat S, Ozturk C. Repair bond strength of composite to Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiated zirconia and porcelain surfaces. Biomed J 2019; 42 (03) 193-199
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Aboushelib MN, de Jager N, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJJDM. Microtensile bond strength of different components of core veneered all-ceramic restorations. Dent Mater 2005; 21 (10) 984-991
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Agingu C, Zhang C-y, Jiang N-w. et al. Intraoral repair of chipped or fractured veneered zirconia crowns and fixed dental prosthesis: clinical guidelines based on literature review. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology. (Singap) 2018; 32 (15) 1711-1723
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Hickel R, Brüshaver K, Ilie N. Repair of restorations–criteria for decision making and clinical recommendations. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (01) 28-50
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Mesquita AMM, Al-Haj Husain N, Molinero-Mourelle P, Özcan M. An intraoral repair method for chipping fracture of a multi-unit fixed zirconia reconstruction: a direct dental technique. Eur J Dent 2021; 15 (01) 174-178
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Kumbuloglu O, User A, Toksavul S, Vallittu PKJAOS. Intra-oral adhesive systems for ceramic repairs: a comparison. Acta Odontol Scand 2003; 61 (05) 268-272
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Arami S, Hasani Tabatabaei M, Namdar F, Safavi N, Chiniforush N. Shear bond strength of the repair composite resin to zirconia ceramic by different surface treatment. J Lasers Med Sci 2014; 5 (04) 171-175
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Li R, Wang C, Ma SQ. et al. High bonding strength between zirconia and composite resin based on combined surface treatment for dental restorations. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2020; 18: 2280800020928655
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 13 Xie H, Li Q, Zhang F. et al. Comparison of resin bonding improvements to zirconia between one-bottle universal adhesives and tribochemical silica coating, which is better?. Dent Mater 2016; 32 (03) 403-411
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Casucci A, Osorio E, Osorio R. et al. Influence of different surface treatments on surface zirconia frameworks. J Dent 2009; 37 (11) 891-897
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Amaral M, Belli R, Cesar PF, Valandro LF, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. The potential of novel primers and universal adhesives to bond to zirconia. J Dent 2014; 42 (01) 90-98
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Cristoforides P, Amaral R, May LG, Bottino MA, Valandro LF. Composite resin to yttria stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal bonding: comparison of repair methods. Oper Dent 2012; 37 (03) 263-271
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Wolfart M, Lehmann F, Wolfart S, Kern M. Durability of the resin bond strength to zirconia ceramic after using different surface conditioning methods. Dent Mater 2007; 23 (01) 45-50
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Oyagüe RC, Monticelli F, Toledano M, Osorio E, Ferrari M, Osorio R. Effect of water aging on microtensile bond strength of dual-cured resin cements to pre-treated sintered zirconium-oxide ceramics. Dent Mater 2009; 25 (03) 392-399
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Suliman A-HA, Swift Jr EJ, Perdigao J. Effects of surface treatment and bonding agents on bond strength of composite resin to porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 1993; 70 (02) 118-120
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Attia A. Influence of surface treatment and cyclic loading on the durability of repaired all-ceramic crowns. J Appl Oral Sci 2010; 18 (02) 194-200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Lüthy H, Loeffel O, Hammerle CHJDM. Effect of thermocycling on bond strength of luting cements to zirconia ceramic. Dent Mater 2006; 22 (02) 195-200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Perdigão J, Swift Jr EJ. Universal adhesives. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015; 27 (06) 331-334
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Tian F, Zhou L, Zhang Z. et al. Paucity of nanolayering in resin-dentin interfaces of MDP-based adhesives. J Dent Res 2016; 95 (04) 380-387
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Yoshida Y, Yoshihara K, Hayakawa S. et al. HEMA inhibits interfacial nano-layering of the functional monomer MDP. J Dent Res 2012; 91 (11) 1060-1065
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Seabra B, Arantes-Oliveira S, Portugal J. Influence of multimode universal adhesives and zirconia primer application techniques on zirconia repair. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112 (02) 182-187
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Kim JH, Chae SY, Lee Y, Han GJ, Cho BH. Effects of multipurpose, universal adhesives on resin bonding to zirconia ceramic. Oper Dent 2015; 40 (01) 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Lopes GC, Spohr AM, De Souza GM. Different strategies to bond Bis-GMA-based resin cement to zirconia. J Adhes Dent 2016; 18 (03) 239-246
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Reis A, Loguercio AD. A 36-month clinical evaluation of ethanol/water and acetone-based etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2009; 34 (04) 384-391
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Shafiei F, Fattah Z, Kiomarsi N, Dashti MH. Influence of primers and additional resin layer on zirconia repair bond strength. J Prosthodont 2019; 28 (07) 826-832
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Mahgoli H, Arshad M, Rasouli K, Sobati AA, Shamshiri AR. Repair bond strength of composite to zirconia ceramic using two types of zirconia primers. Front Dent 2019; 16 (05) 342-350
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Perdigão J, Fernandes SD, Pinto AM, Oliveira FA. Effect of artificial aging and surface treatment on bond strengths to dental zirconia. Oper Dent 2013; 38 (02) 168-176
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar