Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics

This study aimed at evaluating the effects of different surface conditionings on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of a self-adhesive resin cement to VITA Suprinity (ZLS) and IPS e.max CAD (LD). Three surface conditioning protocols were performed on ZLS and LD before luting with a self-adhesive re...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Alessandro Vichi, Riccardo Fabian Fonzar, Michele Carrabba, Chris Louca, Nicola Scotti, Claudia Mazzitelli, Lorenzo Breschi, Cecilia Goracci
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	VITA Suprinity e.max CAD lithium disilicate lithium silicate hydrofluoric acid silane Technology T Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering TK1-9971 Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) TA1-2040 Microscopy QH201-278.5 Descriptive and experimental mechanics QC120-168.85
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a36de27a055d43dcb7c8d16512c4760b
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a36de27a055d43dcb7c8d16512c4760b
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a36de27a055d43dcb7c8d16512c4760b2021-11-25T18:13:28ZComparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics10.3390/ma142267761996-1944https://doaj.org/article/a36de27a055d43dcb7c8d16512c4760b2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/14/22/6776https://doaj.org/toc/1996-1944This study aimed at evaluating the effects of different surface conditionings on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of a self-adhesive resin cement to VITA Suprinity (ZLS) and IPS e.max CAD (LD). Three surface conditioning protocols were performed on ZLS and LD before luting with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem 2, RXU): hydrofluoric acid (HF), HF + silane (HF + S), or Monobond Etch & Prime (EP). In each group, 15 cylindrical buildups of RXU were prepared on five milled bars and submitted to a µSBS test. Data were statistically analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Failure modes were recorded and classified as adhesive, mixed, cohesive in resin, or ceramic, and statistically analyzed with Fisher’s exact test (<i>p</i> = 0.05). One additional bar per group was used for the morphological characterization of the conditioned surface by means of SEM. The material per se did not significantly influence adhesion (<i>p</i> = 0.744). Conditioning protocol was a significant factor: EP yielded significantly higher μSBS than HF (<i>p</i> = 0.005), while no significant differences emerged between EP and HF + S (<i>p</i> = 0.107), or HF + S and HF (<i>p</i> = 0.387). The material-conditioning protocol interaction was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.109). Significant intergroup differences were found in distribution of failure modes: mixed failures were predominant in the ZLS/EP group, while the other groups showed a prevalence of adhesive failures. The self-etching primer showed promising results in terms of immediate bond strength of a self-adhesive resin cement to lithium-silica-based glass ceramics, suggesting its alternative use to hydrofluoric acid and silane conditioning protocols.Alessandro VichiRiccardo Fabian FonzarMichele CarrabbaChris LoucaNicola ScottiClaudia MazzitelliLorenzo BreschiCecilia GoracciMDPI AGarticleVITA Suprinitye.max CADlithium disilicatelithium silicatehydrofluoric acidsilaneTechnologyTElectrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineeringTK1-9971Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General)TA1-2040MicroscopyQH201-278.5Descriptive and experimental mechanicsQC120-168.85ENMaterials, Vol 14, Iss 6776, p 6776 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	VITA Suprinity e.max CAD lithium disilicate lithium silicate hydrofluoric acid silane Technology T Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering TK1-9971 Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) TA1-2040 Microscopy QH201-278.5 Descriptive and experimental mechanics QC120-168.85
spellingShingle	VITA Suprinity e.max CAD lithium disilicate lithium silicate hydrofluoric acid silane Technology T Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering TK1-9971 Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) TA1-2040 Microscopy QH201-278.5 Descriptive and experimental mechanics QC120-168.85 Alessandro Vichi Riccardo Fabian Fonzar Michele Carrabba Chris Louca Nicola Scotti Claudia Mazzitelli Lorenzo Breschi Cecilia Goracci Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
description	This study aimed at evaluating the effects of different surface conditionings on the microshear bond strength (µSBS) of a self-adhesive resin cement to VITA Suprinity (ZLS) and IPS e.max CAD (LD). Three surface conditioning protocols were performed on ZLS and LD before luting with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem 2, RXU): hydrofluoric acid (HF), HF + silane (HF + S), or Monobond Etch & Prime (EP). In each group, 15 cylindrical buildups of RXU were prepared on five milled bars and submitted to a µSBS test. Data were statistically analyzed with two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Failure modes were recorded and classified as adhesive, mixed, cohesive in resin, or ceramic, and statistically analyzed with Fisher’s exact test (<i>p</i> = 0.05). One additional bar per group was used for the morphological characterization of the conditioned surface by means of SEM. The material per se did not significantly influence adhesion (<i>p</i> = 0.744). Conditioning protocol was a significant factor: EP yielded significantly higher μSBS than HF (<i>p</i> = 0.005), while no significant differences emerged between EP and HF + S (<i>p</i> = 0.107), or HF + S and HF (<i>p</i> = 0.387). The material-conditioning protocol interaction was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.109). Significant intergroup differences were found in distribution of failure modes: mixed failures were predominant in the ZLS/EP group, while the other groups showed a prevalence of adhesive failures. The self-etching primer showed promising results in terms of immediate bond strength of a self-adhesive resin cement to lithium-silica-based glass ceramics, suggesting its alternative use to hydrofluoric acid and silane conditioning protocols.
format	article
author	Alessandro Vichi Riccardo Fabian Fonzar Michele Carrabba Chris Louca Nicola Scotti Claudia Mazzitelli Lorenzo Breschi Cecilia Goracci
author_facet	Alessandro Vichi Riccardo Fabian Fonzar Michele Carrabba Chris Louca Nicola Scotti Claudia Mazzitelli Lorenzo Breschi Cecilia Goracci
author_sort	Alessandro Vichi
title	Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
title_short	Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
title_full	Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
title_fullStr	Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics
title_sort	comparison between hydrofluoric acid and single-component primer as conditioners on resin cement adhesion to lithium silicate and lithium disilicate glass ceramics
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/a36de27a055d43dcb7c8d16512c4760b
work_keys_str_mv	AT alessandrovichi comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT riccardofabianfonzar comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT michelecarrabba comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT chrislouca comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT nicolascotti comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT claudiamazzitelli comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT lorenzobreschi comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics AT ceciliagoracci comparisonbetweenhydrofluoricacidandsinglecomponentprimerasconditionersonresincementadhesiontolithiumsilicateandlithiumdisilicateglassceramics
_version_	1718411456219709440

Comparison between Hydrofluoric Acid and Single-Component Primer as Conditioners on Resin Cement Adhesion to Lithium Silicate and Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramics

Ejemplares similares