ABSTRACT: 0232

Adhesive performance of a new resin cement to non-silica ceramics

J.-H. PHARK¹, S. DUARTE, Jr.¹, M.B. BLATZ², and A. SADAN¹, ¹Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA, ²University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) of a new resin cement to nine different high-strength (non-silica) ceramic surfaces, including two novel modified zirconia surfaces. Methods: Composite cylinders were bonded to nine different high strength ceramic surfaces using a new resin cement containing a modified phosphate monomer (Clearfil Esthetic, Kuraray) and a Bis-GMA resin cement (RelyX ARC, 3M ESPE). The ceramic disks were either restorative intaglio surfaces: Procera alumina, Procera laminate alumina, and Procera zirconia; machined surfaces: machined alumina and machined zirconia; modified surfaces: NobelBond 1 and NobelBond 2; or sandblasted surfaces: sandblasted alumina and sandblasted zirconia . The total number of tested samples was 360. SBS was tested before and after artificial aging: 3 days (early group) and 90 d water storage and 20,000 cycles thermocycling (late group). Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests with a=0.001. Results: Thermocycling significantly decreased bond strength to non-silica based ceramics.

Groups

Early mean±SD (MPa)

Late mean±SD (MPa)

Procera alumina Clearfil

17.49±4.5^cd

2.89±3.1^fg

Procera alumina ARC

9.85±4.0^e

0.11±0.3^g

Procera zirconia Clearfil

19.61±2.2^bc

12.90±2.7^de

Procera zirconia ARC

14.81±3.1^d

10.70±4.9^e

Nobel Bond 1 Clearfil

38.47±4.0^a

35.67±5.5a

Nobel Bond 1 ARC

37.40±3.8^a

41.45±3.2a

Nobel Bond 2 Clearfil

23.77±4.2^b

17.58±2.0^cd

Nobel Bond 2 ARC

15.79±1.4^d

9.78±4.0^e

Machined alumina Clearfil

10.56±3.6^e

0.0000^g

Machined alumina ARC

6.40±2.2^f

0.0000^g

Machined zirconia Clearfil

7.3649^f

0.0000^g

Machined zirconia ARC

7.18±3.8^f

0.0000^g

Sandblasted alumina Cearfil

18.35±6.1^c

2.62±2.0^g

Sandblasted alumina ARC

10.65±2.3^e

0.0000^g

Sandblasted zirconia Clearfil

20.25±4.3^b

6.69±1.9^f

Sandblasted zirconia ARC

10.79±2.5^e

0.10±0.3^g

Laminate alumina Clearfil

21.12±3.8^b

13.82±2.5^de

Laminate alumina ARC

9.82±1.1^e

0.25±0.6^g

(different superscript letters indicate significant difference)

Conclusions: Bond strength to the new resin cement was significantly better than the control. Bond strength to one of the modified zirconia surfaces was significantly better than to all other surfaces.

Seq #53 - Cement Bond to Ceramics, Interface Characterization, Stress
10:45 AM-12:15 PM, Thursday, July 3, 2008
Metro Toronto Convention Centre Room 803A

Back to the Dental Materials 3: Ceramic-based Materials and Cements Program