Serra-Prat Josep, Cano-Batalla Jordi, Cabratosa-Termes Josep, Figueras-Àlvarez Oscar
Graduate student, Dentistry Laboratory and Clinical Technique Research, International University of Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
Research Collaborator, Department of Prosthodontics, International University of Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Sep;112(3):600-5. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.01.004. Epub 2014 Mar 24.
New technologies have led to the introduction of new materials, so an evaluation of the adhesion of ceramics to these materials is needed.
The purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strength of dental porcelain to cast, milled, and laser-sintered cobalt-chromium alloys, and to investigate the adhesive bond and failure type after thermocycling, 90 metal cylinders (10 mm diameter and 10 mm height) were prepared from cast (30 specimens), milled (30 specimens), and laser-sintered (30 specimens) alloys.
Ceramic cylinders (2.5 mm diameter and 4 mm length) were fused to the alloy cylinders. For each group, 15 specimens were thermocycled 5500 times at temperatures between 4°C and 60°C before testing. After testing, the specimen surfaces were visually examined to determine the failure mode. Differences in adhesion values according to manufacturing method, testing condition (thermocycling or no thermocycling), and interaction between the factors were evaluated with a 2-way ANOVA. The χ(2) test (95% confidence level) was performed to determine whether the failure mode was associated with the testing condition.
Adhesion strengths for the nonthermocycled specimens were 42.79 ±14.14 MPa (cast), 37.56 ±9.18 MPa (milled), and 29.09 ±6.95 MPa (laser-sintered), and, for the thermocycled specimens, 16.52 ±8.96 MPa (cast), 22.21 ±13.25 MPa (milled), and 24.28 ±10.13 MPa (laser-sintered). Two-way ANOVA results indicated no statistically significant differences in adhesion among the manufacturing methods (P=.257), but statistically significant differences were observed according to both testing conditions (P<.001) and interaction between the factors (P=.015). The χ(2) test indicated that the failure mode was not associated with the testing condition (thermocycled, P=.280; nonthermocycled, P=.240).
The porcelain adhesion values for all the materials were adequate for clinical applications. No significant adhesion differences were observed between cast, milled, and laser-sintered specimens, or among thermocycled and nonthermocycled laser-sintered specimens. However, significant adhesion differences were observed among the thermocycled and nonthermocycled cast and the milled specimens.
新技术带来了新材料的引入，因此需要评估陶瓷与这些材料之间的附着力。
本研究的目的是比较牙科瓷与铸造、铣削和激光烧结钴铬合金的剪切粘结强度，并研究热循环后的粘结粘结和失效类型。制备了90个金属圆柱体（直径10毫米，高10毫米），分别由铸造（30个样本）、铣削（30个样本）和激光烧结（30个样本）合金制成。
将陶瓷圆柱体（直径2.5毫米，长4毫米）熔合到合金圆柱体上。对于每组，在测试前，15个样本在4°C至60°C的温度下进行5500次热循环。测试后，对样本表面进行目视检查以确定失效模式。根据制造方法、测试条件（热循环或无热循环）以及因素之间的相互作用，使用双向方差分析评估附着力值的差异。进行χ(2)检验（95%置信水平）以确定失效模式是否与测试条件相关。
未进行热循环的样本的粘结强度分别为42.79±14.14兆帕（铸造）、37.56±9.18兆帕（铣削）和29.09±6.95兆帕（激光烧结），进行热循环的样本的粘结强度分别为16.52±8.96兆帕（铸造）、22.21±13.25兆帕（铣削）和24.28±10.13兆帕（激光烧结）。双向方差分析结果表明，制造方法之间的附着力在统计学上没有显著差异（P = 0.257），但根据测试条件（P < 0.001）和因素之间的相互作用（P = 0.015）观察到统计学上的显著差异。χ(2)检验表明，失效模式与测试条件无关（热循环，P = 0.280；未热循环，P = 0.240）。
所有材料的瓷粘结值足以用于临床应用。铸造、铣削和激光烧结样本之间，以及热循环和未热循环的激光烧结样本之间未观察到显著的粘结差异。然而，在热循环和未热循环的铸造样本以及铣削样本之间观察到了显著的粘结差异。
