Search

Purpose: To measure zirconia-to-zirconia microtensile bond strength (µTBS) using composite cements with and without primer. Materials and Methods: Two Initial Zirconia UHT (GC) sticks (1.8x1.8x5.0 mm) were bonded using four cements with and without their respective manufacturer's primer/adhesive (G-CEM ONE [GOne] and G-Multi Primer, GC; Panavia V5 [Pv5]), and Panavia SA Cement Universal [PSAu], and Clearfil Ceramic Plus, Kuraray Noritake; RelyX Universal (RXu) and Scotchbond Universal Plus [SBUp], 3M Oral Care). Specimens were trimmed to an hour-glass shaped specimen whose isthmus is circular in cross-section. After 1-week water storage, the specimens were either tested immediately (1-week µTBS) or first subjected to 50,000 thermocycles (50kTC-aged µTBS). The fracture mode was categorized as either adhesive interfacial failure, cohesive failure in composite cement, or mixed failure, followed by SEM fracture analysis of selected specimens. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects statistics (α = 0.05; variables: composite cement, primer/adhesive application, aging). Results: The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences with aging (p = 0.3662). No significant difference in µTBS with/without primer and aging was recorded for GOne and PSAu. A significantly higher µTBS was recorded for Pv5 and RXu when applied with their respective primer/adhesive. Comparing the four composite cements when they were applied in the manner that resulted in their best performance, a significant difference in 50kTC-aged µTBS was found for PSAu compared to Pv5 and RXu. A significant decrease in µTBS upon 50kTC aging was only recorded for RXu in combination with SBUp. Conclusion: Adequate bonding to zirconia requires the functional monomer 10-MDP either contained in the composite cement, in which case a separate 10-MDP primer is no longer needed, or in the separately applied primer/adhesive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the bonding performance of three universal adhesives (UAs) to dentin and the effect of different curing modes and hydrofluoric-acid (HF) etching of lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic on the adhesive performance of two UA/composite cement (CC) combinations. Materials and Methods: In the first project part, the immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of the two light-curing UAs G2-Bond Universal (G2B; GC) and Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBUp; 3M Oral Care), and the self-curing UA Tokuyama Universal Bond II (TUBII; Tokuyama) to flat dentin was measured, when applied in both E&R and SE bonding mode using a split-tooth design (n = 10). The resultant adhesive-dentin interfaces were characterized using TEM. In the second project part, CAD/CAM composite blocks were luted to flat dentin with either Scotchbond Universal Plus/RelyX Universal (SBUp/RxU; 3M Oral Care) or Tokuyama Universal Bond II/Estecem II Plus (TUBII/ECIIp; Tokuyama) using different curing modes (AA mode: auto-curing of both adhesive and cement; AL mode: auto-curing of adhesive and light-curing of cement), upon which their immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) µTBS was measured. In the third project part, the same UA/CC combinations were luted to CAD/CAM glass-ceramic to measure their immediate and aged (6-month water storage) shear bond strength (SBS). Results: In E&R bonding mode, the performance of G2B, SBUp and TUBII was not significantly different in terms of µTBS, while G2B and SBUp significantly outperformed TUBII in SE bonding mode. No significant difference in µTBS was found between the SBUp/RxU and TUBII/ECIIp UA/CC combinations, regardless of bonding mode, aging time, or curing mode. The cement-curing mode did not significantly influence µTBS, while a significantly higher µTBS was recorded for the UA/CC combinations applied in E&R bonding mode. HF significantly improved the SBS of the UA/CC combinations to glass-ceramic. Conclusion: The self-curing adhesive performed better when applied in E&R than in SE bonding mode. The curing mode did not influence the adhesive performance of the composite cements, while an E&R bonding mode rendered more favorable adhesion in a self-curing luting protocol. When bonding to glass-ceramic, the adhesive performance of the UA/CC combinations benefited from HF etching. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To validate the rationale of using a conventional light-curing resin-based composite (RBC) to lute thick indirect restorations by measuring mini-interfacial fracture toughness (mini-iFT). Materials and Methods: Freshly exposed dentin of extracted third molars (n = 64) was immediately sealed with a thin layer of an experimental RBC with a 50 wt% or 75 wt% (IDS) filler load. Two- or 6-mm-thick CAD/CAM composite blocks were luted onto IDS using either pre-heated light-cure or dual-cure luting RBC, with the latter having served as control. Samples were cut into sticks, upon which a notch was prepared at the interface between IDS and luting RBC, prior to being submitted to a 4-point bending test to determine mini-iFT. The results were analyzed using a mixed linear model (LME). Failure mode at the fractured interface was determined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results: LME revealed that mini-iFT was not significantly affected by the composite block thickness (p = 0.39), but by the luting RBC (p < 0.0001) and the IDS RBC filler load (p = 0.0011). Mini-iFT was higher with 50 wt% fillerloaded RBC IDS and when luted using the light-curing RBC. Conclusion: This work provides the proof of concept that 2- and 6-mm-thick indirect restorations can safely be adhesively luted with pre-heated conventional light-cure RBC under controlled light-irradiation conditions. This strategy even seems beneficial in terms of mini-iFT compared to using a dual-cure luting RBC. IDS with lower filler content also appeared more favorable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The material structure and chemical elemental composition of a new self-adhesive composite hybrid were investigated. The bonding performance when applied on flat (FLAT) vs high C-factor class-I cavity-bottom (CAVITY) dentin and in light-cure (LC) vs self-cure (SC) mode was determined. Materials and Methods: The self-adhesive bulk-fill composite Surefil One (Su-O; Dentsply Sirona) was compared with the resin-modified glass-ionomer Fuji II LC Improved (Fuji2LC; GC) and the ion-releasing alkasite material Cention N (CentionN; Ivoclar Vivadent). The material structure was examined with SEM and TEM, while the chemical elemental composition was analyzed using EDS. The immediate and aged microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of Su-O_LC/SC was compared to that of Fuji2LC applied without any pre-treatment, and to that of CentionN applied following bonding with Adhese Universal (AU) (Ivoclar Vivadent) in self-etch mode (AU/CentionN). All restorative materials were bonded onto FLAT and CAVITY dentin. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test. Results: EDS analysis revealed that Su-O was richer in C and P than the reference restorative materials. Applied to FLAT dentin, the significantly highest immediate and aged µTBS were recorded for AU/CentionN, which were not significantly different only from Su-O_LC. Applied to CAVITY dentin, the significantly highest immediate µTBS was recorded for AU/CentionN, which did not differ significantly only from Su-O_SC. Su-O_LC bonded to CAVITY dentin suffered from a high incidence of pre-test failures. Conclusion: While Su-O_LC bonded effectively and durably to FLAT dentin, Su-O_SC bonded more favorably than Su-O_LC in class-I cavities, which was probably related to shrinkage stress variously challenging the respective bond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To measure zirconia-to-zirconia microtensile bond strength (µTBS) using composite cements with and without primer., Materials and Methods: Two Initial Zirconia UHT (GC) sticks (1.8x1.8x5.0 mm) were bonded using four cements with and without their respective manufacturer's primer/adhesive (G-CEM ONE [GOne] and G-Multi Primer, GC; Panavia V5 [Pv5]), and Panavia SA Cement Universal [PSAu], and Clearfil Ceramic Plus, Kuraray Noritake; RelyX Universal (RXu) and Scotchbond Universal Plus [SBUp], 3M Oral Care). Specimens were trimmed to an hour-glass shaped specimen whose isthmus is circular in cross-section. After 1-week water storage, the specimens were either tested immediately (1-week μTBS) or first subjected to 50,000 thermocycles (50kTC-aged μTBS). The fracture mode was categorized as either adhesive interfacial failure, cohesive failure in composite cement, or mixed failure, followed by SEM fracture analysis of selected specimens. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects statistics (α = 0.05; variables: composite cement, primer/adhesive application, aging)., Results: The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences with aging (p = 0.3662). No significant difference in µTBS with/without primer and aging was recorded for GOne and PSAu. A significantly higher µTBS was recorded for Pv5 and RXu when applied with their respective primer/adhesive. Comparing the four composite cements when they were applied in the manner that resulted in their best performance, a significant difference in 50kTC-aged μTBS was found for PSAu compared to Pv5 and RXu. A significant decrease in µTBS upon 50kTC aging was only recorded for RXu in combination with SBUp., Conclusion: Adequate bonding to zirconia requires the functional monomer 10-MDP either contained in the composite cement, in which case a separate 10-MDP primer is no longer needed, or in the separately applied primer/adhesive.

Purpose: To investigate the bonding performance of three universal adhesives (UAs) to dentin and the effect of different curing modes and hydrofluoric-acid (HF) etching of lithium-disilicate glass-ceramic on the adhesive performance of two UA/composite cement (CC) combinations., Materials and Methods: In the first project part, the immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of the two light-curing UAs G2-Bond Universal (G2B; GC) and Scotchbond Universal Plus (SBUp; 3M Oral Care), and the self-curing UA Tokuyama Universal Bond II (TUBII; Tokuyama) to flat dentin was measured, when applied in both E&R and SE bonding mode using a split-tooth design (n = 10). The resultant adhesive-dentin interfaces were characterized using TEM. In the second project part, CAD/CAM composite blocks were luted to flat dentin with either Scotchbond Universal Plus/RelyX Universal (SBUp/RxU; 3M Oral Care) or Tokuyama Universal Bond II/Estecem II Plus (TUBII/ECIIp; Tokuyama Dental) using different curing modes (AA mode: auto-curing of both adhesive and cement; AL mode: auto-curing of adhesive and light-curing of cement), upon which their immediate and aged (25k and 50k thermocycles) µTBS was measured. In the third project part, the same UA/CC combinations were luted to CAD/CAM glass-ceramic to measure their immediate and aged (6-month water storage) shear bond strength (SBS)., Results: In E&R bonding mode, the performance of G2B, SBUp and TUBII was not significantly different in terms of µTBS, while G2B and SBUp significantly outperformed TUBII in SE bonding mode. No significant difference in µTBS was found between the SBUp/RxU and TUBII/ECIIp UA/CC combinations, regardless of bonding mode, aging time, or curing mode. The cement-curing mode did not significantly influence µTBS, while a significantly higher µTBS was recorded for the UA/CC combinations applied in E&R bonding mode. HF significantly improved the SBS of the UA/CC combinations to glass-ceramic., Conclusion: The self-curing adhesive performed better when applied in E&R than in SE bonding mode. The curing mode did not influence the adhesive performance of the composite cements, while an E&R bonding mode rendered more favorable adhesion in a self-curing luting protocol. When bonding to glass-ceramic, the adhesive performance of the universal adhesive/composite cement combinations benefited from HF etching.

Purpose: The material structure and chemical elemental composition of a new self-adhesive composite hybrid were investigated. The bonding performance when applied on flat (FLAT) vs high C-factor class-I cavity-bottom (CAVITY) dentin and in light-cure (LC) vs self-cure (SC) mode was determined., Materials and Methods: The self-adhesive bulk-fill composite Surefil One (Su-O; Dentsply Sirona) was compared with the resin-modified glass-ionomer Fuji II LC Improved (Fuji2LC; GC) and the ion-releasing alkasite material Cention N (CentionN; Ivoclar Vivadent). The material structure was examined with SEM and TEM, while the chemical elemental composition was analyzed using EDS. The immediate and aged microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of Su-O&#95;LC/SC was compared to that of Fuji2LC applied without any pre-treatment, and to that of CentionN applied following bonding with Adhese Universal (AU) (Ivoclar Vivadent) in self-etch mode (AU/CentionN). All restorative materials were bonded onto FLAT and CAVITY dentin. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test., Results: EDS analysis revealed that Su-O was richer in C and P than the reference restorative materials. Applied to FLAT dentin, the significantly highest immediate and aged μTBS were recorded for AU/CentionN, which were not significantly different only from Su-O&#95;LC. Applied to CAVITY dentin, the significantly highest immediate μTBS was recorded for AU/CentionN, which did not differ significantly only from Su-O&#95;SC. Su-O&#95;LC bonded to CAVITY dentin suffered from a high incidence of pre-test failures., Conclusion: While Su-O&#95;LC bonded effectively and durably to FLAT dentin, Su-O&#95;SC bonded more favorably than Su-O&#95;LC in class-I cavities, which was probably related to shrinkage stress variously challenging the respective bond.