Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental Materials Division, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas-UNICAMP, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):420-7. doi: 10.2341/09-152-L.
This study evaluated the influence of etching periods on the surface/interface morphology and bond strength to glass ceramic with or without application of an unfilled resin after silane. Ceramic discs were divided into 12 groups, defined by etching time with 10% hydrofluoric acid: G1/G7--etching for 10 seconds, G2/G8--20 seconds; G3/G9--40 seconds; G4/G10--60 seconds; G5/G11--120 seconds and G6/G12--60 + 60 seconds. All the groups were silanated after etching and G7 - G12 received a layer of unfilled resin after silane. Microshear testing using resin cement was performed, with 12 resin cylinders tested per group. The data was submitted to two-way ANOVA and the Student-Newman-Keuls' test (p<0.05). Evaluation of the etching pattern and bonding interfaces was conducted by SEM. The bond strength means (MPa) were: 19.4 +/- 3.5, 22.3 +/- 5.1, 22.2 +/- 3.2, 17.8 +/- 2.1, 15.3 +/- 3.0 and 14.3 +/- 1.8 for G1-G6 and 17.4 +/- 4.8, 21.3 +/- 2.1, 21.1 +/- 2.3, 24.7 +/- 5.8, 20.4 +/- 2.2 and 18.5 +/- 4.6 for G7-G12. Poor etching was detected after 10 seconds of conditioning; whereas deep channels were extensively observed on surfaces etched for 120 and 60 + 60 seconds. Unfilled voids underlying the ceramic-cement interface were detected when only silane was applied. Full completion of the irregularities on G11 was detected using unfilled resin. When only silane was applied, the 60-second group and those etched for longer periods showed lower bond strengths. When both silane and unfilled resin were applied, all etching periods generally showed similar values. In conclusion, the etching period influenced the surface/interface topography and bond strength to ceramic. The application of unfilled resin was able to infiltrate all unfilled voids beneath the ceramic-cement interface, except on re-etched surfaces.
本研究评估了酸蚀时间对与玻璃陶瓷的表面/界面形态和粘结强度的影响,其中包括硅烷偶联剂处理后应用或不应用未填充树脂。将陶瓷圆盘分为 12 组,根据 10%氢氟酸的酸蚀时间定义:G1/G7-酸蚀 10 秒,G2/G8-20 秒;G3/G9-40 秒;G4/G10-60 秒;G5/G11-120 秒;G6/G12-60+60 秒。所有组均在酸蚀后进行硅烷偶联剂处理,G7-G12 组在硅烷偶联剂处理后涂覆一层未填充树脂。采用树脂粘结剂进行微剪切试验,每组测试 12 个树脂圆柱。数据采用双因素方差分析和 Student-Newman-Keuls 检验(p<0.05)。通过 SEM 评估酸蚀图案和粘结界面。粘结强度均值(MPa)为:G1-G6 组为 19.4±3.5、22.3±5.1、22.2±3.2、17.8±2.1、15.3±3.0 和 14.3±1.8;G7-G12 组为 17.4±4.8、21.3±2.1、21.1±2.3、24.7±5.8、20.4±2.2 和 18.5±4.6。酸蚀 10 秒后发现酸蚀不良;而酸蚀 120 秒和 60+60 秒后,表面出现深槽。仅应用硅烷偶联剂时,在陶瓷-粘结剂界面下检测到未填充的空隙。应用未填充树脂完全填充 G11 的不规则处。仅应用硅烷偶联剂时,60 秒组和酸蚀时间较长的组粘结强度较低。同时应用硅烷偶联剂和未填充树脂时,所有酸蚀时间通常显示出相似的值。结论:酸蚀时间影响陶瓷的表面/界面形貌和粘结强度。未填充树脂的应用能够渗透陶瓷-粘结剂界面下的所有未填充空隙,除了重新酸蚀的表面。