MATERIALS AND METHODS: The HVGICs evaluated were Zirconomer [ZR] (Shofu), Equia Forte [EQ] (GC) and Riva [RV] (SDI). Sixty specimens (12mm x 2mm x 2mm) of each material were fabricated using customized Teflon molds. After initial set, the specimens were removed from their molds, finished, measured and randomly divided into 3 groups of 20. Half the specimens in each group were left uncoated while the remaining half was covered with the respective manufacturers' resin coating. The specimens were subsequently conditioned in distilled water, artificial saliva or citric acid at 37°C for 7 days. The uncoated and coated specimens (n=10) were then subjected to dynamic mechanical testing in flexure mode at 37°C with a frequency of 0.1 to 10Hz. Storage modulus, loss modulus and loss tangent data were subjected to normality testing and statistical analysis using one-way ANOVA/Scheffe's post-hoc test and Ttest at significance level p<0.05.
RESULTS: Mean storage modulus ranged from 1.39 ± 0.36 to 10.80 ± 0.86 GPa while mean loss modulus varied from 0.13 ± 0.03 to 0.70 ± 0.14 GPa after conditioning in the different mediums. Values for loss tangent ranged from 39.4 ± 7.75 to 213.2 ± 20.11 (x10 -3 ). Significant differences in visco-elastic properties were observed between mediums and materials. When conditioned in distilled water and artificial saliva,storage modulus was significantly improved when ZR, EQ and RV were uncoated. Significantly higher values were, however, observed with resin coating when the materials were exposed to citric acid.
CONCLUSION: The visco-elastic properties of HVGICs were influenced by both resin coating and chemical environment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three different makes of ceramic brackets, Pure Sapphire(M), Clarity™ ADVANCED(P) and Dual Ceramic(P) were used. Eighteen specimens of each make were prepared and allocated to three groups (n = 6). MARC(®)-resin calibrator was used to determine the light curing unit (LCU) tip irradiance (mW/cm(2)) and TLE (J/cm(2)) transmitted through the ceramic brackets, and through ceramic bracket plus Transbond™ XT Light Cure Adhesive, for 5, 10 and 20 s. Vickers-hardness values at the bottom of the cured adhesive were determined. Statistical analysis used one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); P = 0.05.
RESULTS: TLE transmission rose significantly among all samples with increasing exposure durations. TLE reaching the adhesive- enamel interface was less than 10 J/cm(2), and through monocrystalline and polycrystalline ceramic brackets was significantly different (P
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Clinical outcomes were assessed in 47 patients with 88 LD crowns using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria and survival rates. The questionnaire for predictors included 3 aspects: (a) sociodemographic characteristics, (b) oral health habits (tooth brushing frequency, flossing frequency, and dental visits), and (c) satisfaction of the restorations (aesthetics, function, fit, cleansability, and chewing ability of the crowns, and overall satisfaction). Frequency distributions were computed using univariate and multivariate analysis. The Student t test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare means across variables. Correlation analysis was done to assess the association between continuous variables.
RESULTS: The age of crowns was 34.7 ± 9.7 months. The survival rate was 96.6% at 35.9 ± 9.2 months. There was a significant association between successful crown function and oral hygiene measures: tooth brushing (p˂ 0.001), dental visits (p = 0.006), and flossing (p = 0.009). A strong negative correlation was observed between aesthetic satisfaction (r = -0.717, p˂ 0.001) and chewing ability (r = -0.639, p˂ 0.001) with crown age. The linear regression model was significant for all predictors (p < 0.05) except overall satisfaction (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The LD crowns had long survival rates of 96.6% up to 35.9 ± 9.2 months and provided satisfactory clinical performance (low risk of failure). Oral hygiene habits such as brushing, flossing, and regular dental visits influenced patient satisfaction with LD crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 of the two types of fiber posts, namely, FRC Prostec (FRC) and Fiber KOR (KOR), were used for the experiment. UV irradiation was applied on top of the fiber post surface for 0, 15, 20, and 30 min. The irradiated surface of the fiber posts (n = 5) were immediately bonded with resin cement (Rely X U200) after UV irradiation. Shear bond strength (SBS) MPa was measured, and the dislodged area of post surfaces was examined with scanning electron microscopes. Changes in surface roughness (Ra) of the FRC group after UV irradiation were observed (n = 3) using atomic force microscopy. Data of SBS were statistically analyzed using one-way analysis of variance, followed by multiple comparisons (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: SBS was significantly higher for 20 min of UV irradiation of the FRC group while significantly higher SBS was observed with 15 min of UV irradiation of the KOR group. Resin cement was more evident (cohesive failure) on the dislodged post surface of the UV treated groups compared with the control. The surface roughness of the FRC post was Ra = 175.1 nm and Ra = 929.2 nm for the control and the 20 min group, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Higher surface roughness of the UV irradiated group indicated formation of mechanical retention on the fiber post surface. Evidence of cohesive failure was observed which indicated higher SBS of fiber post with the UV irradiated group.
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.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty maxillary central incisors were divided into Group I, II, and III with 20 samples each based on luting cement used. They were OF, self-adhesive (SA) cement, and total etch (TE) cement. These groups were subdivided into "a" and "b" of ten each based on the type of veneering materials used. Veneer discs were fabricated using Ormocer restorative (O) and pressable ceramic (C). Specimens were thermocycled and loaded under universal testing machine for SBS. The statistical analysis was done using one-way ANOVA post hoc Tukey honest significant difference method.
RESULTS: A significant difference was observed between the Groups I and II (P < 0.05). The highest mean bond strength when using ormocer veneer was obtained with the Group Ia (19.11 ± 1.92 Mpa) and lowest by Group IIa (8.1 ± 1.04 Mpa), whereas the highest mean bond strength while using ceramic veneer was of similar range for Group Ib (18.04 ± 4.08 Mpa) and Group IIIb (18.07 ± 1.40 Mpa). SEM analysis revealed OF and TE presented mixed type of failure when compared with SA where failure mode was totally adhesive.
CONCLUSION: OF was found equally efficient like TE. Bond strength of ormocer as a veneer was not inferior to ceramic making it one of the promising additions in the field of dentistry.