Materials and Methods: Ninety aluminum oxide ceramic (Turkom-Ceramic Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) specimens were produced and divided into nine groups to receive the following surface treatments: control group, no treatment (Group C), sandblasting (Group B), silica coating (Group S), erbium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser irradiation at 150 mJ 10 Hz (Group L1), Er:YAG laser irradiation at 300 mJ 10 Hz (Group L2), sandblasting + L1 (Group BL1), sandblasting + L2 (Group BL2), silica coating + L1 (Group SL1), and silica coating + L2 (Group SL2). After surface treatments, surface roughness (SR) values were measured and surface topography was evaluated. Resin cement was applied on the specimen surface, and shear bond strength (SBS) tests were performed. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparisons at a significance level of P < 0.05.
Results: Group S, SL1, and SL2 showed significantly increased SR values compared to the control group (P < 0.05); therefore, no significant differences were found among the SR values of Groups B, BL1, BL2, L1, and L2 and the control group (P > 0.05). Group S showed the highest SBS values, whereas the control group showed the lowest SBS values.
Conclusion: Silica coating is the most effective method for resin bonding of high strength ceramic, but Er:YAG laser application decreased the effectiveness.
METHODS: Six makes, three each monocrystalline (M) and polycrystalline (P) were used; PureSapphire (M), SPA Aesthetic (M), Ghost (M), Mist (P), Reflections (P), and Dual Ceramic (P). The Ortholux™ Light Curing Unit (LCU) was used to cure the orthodontic adhesive Transbond™XT. The LCU's tip irradiance was measured and TLE transmitted through the ceramic bracket was obtained, then adhesive added to the bracket, and transmitted TLE measured through bracket-plus-adhesive samples. The LCU was set at five seconds as recommended for curing adhesive through ceramic brackets.
RESULTS: Mean tip irradiance was 1859.2±16.2mW/cm2. The TLE transmitted through brackets alone ranged 1.7 to 3.9J/cm2, in the descending order: Ghost>Pure Sapphire>Reflections>Mist>SPA Aesthetics>Dual Ceramic. The TLE transmitted through bracket-plus-adhesive samples ranged 1.6 to 3.7J/cm2, in the descending order: Ghost>Mist>Reflections>Pure Sapphire>SPA Aesthetics>Dual Ceramic. TLE was reduced with the addition of adhesive (range -0.1 to -0.7J/cm2). There was a significant difference for Pure Sapphire, Reflections, and Mist (P<0.05), but not for SPA Aesthetics, Ghost, and Dual Ceramic. There was no overall significant difference between the monocrystalline and polycrystalline makes. The two best makes were of the monocrystalline type, concerning TLE transmission, but with the exception of polycrystalline Dual Ceramic; the next worst make was a monocrystalline bracket, SPA Aesthetics.
CONCLUSION: Light energy attenuation through ceramic orthodontic brackets is make-dependent, with no overall difference between monocrystalline and polycrystalline brackets. Light energy is further attenuated with the addition of resin-based orthodontic adhesive.
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.
METHODS: Six master dies were duplicated from the prepared maxillary first premolar tooth using nonprecious metal alloy (Wiron 99). Thirty copings (Procera AllCeram) of 0.6-mm thickness were manufactured. Three types of luting media were used: zinc phosphate cement (Elite), glass ionomer cement (Fuji I), and dual-cured composite resin cement (Panavia F). Ten copings were cemented with each type. Two master dies were used for each group, and each of them was used to lute five copings. All groups were cemented according to manufacturer's instructions and received a static load of 5 kg during cementation. After 24 hours of distilled water storage at 37 degrees C, the copings were vertically compressed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.
RESULTS: ANOVA revealed significant differences in the load at fracture among the three groups (p < 0.001). The fracture strength results showed that the mean fracture strength of zinc phosphate cement (Elite), glass ionomer cement (Fuji I), and resin luting cement (Panavia F) were 1091.9 N, 784.8 N, and 1953.5 N, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Different luting agents have an influence on the fracture resistance of Procera AllCeram copings.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this laboratory and finite element analysis study was to investigate the effects on the formation of a hybrid layer of an experimental silane coupling agent containing primer solutions composed of different percentages of hydroxyethyl methacrylate.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 125 sound human premolars were restored in vitro. Simple class I cavities were formed on each tooth, followed by the application of different compositions of experimental silane primers (0%, 5%, 25%, and 50% of hydroxyethyl methacrylate), bonding agents, and dental composite resins. Bond strength tests and scanning electron microscopy analyses were performed. The laboratory experimental results were validated with finite element analysis to determine the pattern of stress distribution. Simulations were conducted by placing the restorative composite resin in a premolar tooth by imitating simple class I cavities. The laboratory and finite element analysis data were significantly different from each other, as determined by 1-way ANOVA. A post hoc analysis was conducted on the bond strength data to further clarify the effects of silane primers.
RESULTS: The strongest bond of hybrid layer (16.96 MPa) was found in the primer with 25% hydroxyethyl methacrylate, suggesting a barely visible hybrid layer barrier. The control specimens without the application of the primer and the primer specimens with no hydroxyethyl methacrylate exhibited the lowest strength values (8.30 MPa and 11.78 MPa) with intermittent and low visibility of the hybrid layer. These results were supported by finite element analysis that suggested an evenly distributed stress on the model with 25% hydroxyethyl methacrylate.
CONCLUSIONS: Different compositions of experimental silane primers affected the formation of the hybrid layer and its resulting bond strength.