• 1 Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 2 Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam Malaysia
  • 3 Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Phone: +00966568557923, e-mail:
  • 4 Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • 5 Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry Sana'a University, Sana'a, Yemen
  • 6 Department of Prosthodontics, Riyadh Colleges of Dentistry and Pharmacy, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
J Contemp Dent Pract, 2016 Nov 01;17(11):920-925.
PMID: 27965501


AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of surface treatments on shear bond strength (SBS) of Turkom-Cera (Turkom-Ceramic (M) Sdn. Bhd., Puchong, Malaysia) all-ceramic material cemented with resin cement Panavia-F (Kuraray Medical Inc., Okayama, Japan).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty Turkom-Cera ceramic disks (10 mm × 3 mm) were prepared and randomly divided into four groups. The disks were wet ground to 1000-grit and subjected to four surface treatments: (1) No treatment (Control), (2) sandblasting, (3) silane application, and (4) sandblasting + silane. The four groups of 10 specimens each were bonded with Panavia-F resin cement according to manufacturer's recommendations. The SBS was determined using the universal testing machine (Instron) at 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed. Failure modes were recorded and a qualitative micromorphologic examination of different surface treatments was performed. The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) tests.

RESULTS: The SBS of the control, sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups were: 10.8 ± 1.5, 16.4 ± 3.4, 16.2 ± 2.5, and 19.1 ± 2.4 MPa respectively. According to the Tukey HSD test, only the mean SBS of the control group was significantly different from the other three groups. There was no significant difference between sandblasting, silane, and sandblasting + silane groups.

CONCLUSION: In this study, the three surface treatments used improved the bond strength of resin cement to Turkom-Cera disks.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The surface treatments used in this study appeared to be suitable methods for the cementation of glass infiltrated all-ceramic restorations.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.