Comparison of the Effect of Various Surface Treatments on the Microtensile Bond Strength of Lithium Disilicate Ceramic with Dentin- An In-vitro Study
Abstract
AIM AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of various surface treatments on the microtensile bond strength of Lithium disilicate ceramic with dentin.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 45 human extracted premolars were obtained for the study. The samples were mounted in dental stone blocks having two “V” shaped notch on mesial and distal side of the mounted tooth. The samples were divided into three groups with 15 samples in each. The GROUP-A Control (without any surface treatment), GROUP-B (air abrasion with Al2O3 particles for 15 seconds) and GROUP-C (laser treatment for 5 seconds). Standardize tooth preparation was done on samples and lithium disilicate crowns were fabricated with a loop on occlusal surface. After surface treatment crowns were luted with self adhesive resin cement and pull out load test was performed in universal testing machine. The data was analysed using one way ANOVA TEST for multiple group comparison followed by Tusky HSD post hoc test. Level of significance was considered at 5% (p-value<0.05).
RESULTS: The surface treatment considerably increased the retention of lithium disilicate crowns. The air abrasion group showed the highest microtensile bond strength values. There was significant difference between air abrasion and laser treatment groups.
CONCLUSION: It was evident that microtensile bond strength was adequately increased after both the surface treatments (air abrasion with Al2O3 particles and laser treatment) and there was significant increase in bond strength with air abrasion with Al2O3 particles group when compared to laser treatment group.
References
2. Borges GA, Sophr AM, Goes MF, Correr Sobrinho L, Chan DCN. Effects of etching and airborne particle abrasion on the microstructure of different dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 89: 479-488.
3. Aboushelib M, Sleem D. Microtensile bond strength of lithium disiliccate ceramics to resin adhesives. J Adhes Dent 2014; 16: 547-552.
4. Ӧzdemir H, Aladaḡ L. Effect of different surface treatments on bond strength of different resin cements to lithium disilicate glass ceramic: an in vitro study. Biotech.& Biotech. Equip. 2017; 31:4, 815-820.
5. Ayad MF, Fahmy NZ, Rosenstiel SF. Effect of surface treatment on roughness and bond strength of a heat-pressed ceramic. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99: 123–130.
6. Filho AM, Araújo E, Junior SM. Effect of different ceramic surface treatments on resin microtensile bond strength. Journal of Prosthodontics, March 2004; 13(1) : 28-35.
7. Salvio LA, Correr-Sobrinho LC, Consani S, Sinhoreti MAC, de Goes MF, Knowles JC. Effect of Water Storage and Surface Treatments on the Tensile Bond Strength of IPS Empress 2 Ceramic. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2007; 16(1): 192-199.
8. Panah FG, Rezai SMM, Ahmadian L. The influence of ceramic surface treatments
on the micro-shear bond strength of composite resin to IPS Empress 2. Journal of
Prosthodontics 2008;17: 409–414.
9. Malysa A, Wezgowiec J, Orzeszek S, Florjanski W, Zietek M, Wieckiewicz M. Effect of different surface treatment methods on bond strength of dental ceramics to dental hard tissues: A systematic review. Molecules. 2021 Mar; 26(5): 1223.
10. Kursoglu P, Motro PFK , Yurdaguven H. Shear bond strength of resin cement to an acid etched and a laser irradiated ceramic surface. J Adv Prosthodont 2013;5:98-103.
11. Souza KB, Moura DMD, da Silva SEG , de Araújo GM, de AS Pinto R, Leite FPP, Özcan M, de Assunção e Souza RO. Effect of different surface treatments and multimode adhesive application on the Weibull characteristics, wettability, surface topography and adhesion to CAD/CAM lithium disilicate ceramic. Journal of Applied oral science 2020; 28.
