Curtis Joseph G, Dossett Jon, Prihoda Thomas J, Teixeira Erica C
Department of Prosthodontics, 579th Dental Squadron, United States Air Force, Washington, DC.
United States Air Force Dental Evaluation and Consultation Service, San Antonio, TX.
J Prosthodont. 2015 Jul;24(5):394-400. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12234. Epub 2014 Oct 14.
Although milled titanium may be used as a substructure in fixed and implant prosthodontics, the application of the veneering porcelain presents particular challenges compared to traditional alloys. To address these challenges, some Ti ceramic systems incorporate the application of a bonding agent prior to the opaque layer. Vita Titankeramik's bonding agent is available as a powder, paste, and spray-on formulation. We examined the effect of these three application methods on the bond strength.
Four titanium bars were milled from each of 11 wafers cut from grade II Ti using the Kavo Everest milling unit and a custom-designed milling toolpath. An experienced technician prepared the 25 × 3 × 0.5 mm(3) metal bars and applied bonding agent using one of three application methods, and then applied opaque, dentin, and enamel porcelains according to manufacturer's instructions to a 8 × 3 × 1 mm(3) porcelain. A control group received no bonding agent prior to porcelain application. The four groups (n = 11) were blindly tested for differences in bond strength using a universal testing machine in a three-point bend test configuration, based on ISO 9693-1:2012.
The average (SD) bond strengths for the control, powder, paste, and spray-on groups, respectively, were: 24.8 (2.6), 24.6 (2.6), 25.3 (4.0), and 24.1 (3.9) MPa. One-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison tests were performed between all groups. There were no statistically significant differences among groups (p = 0.951).
Titanium-porcelain bond strength was not affected by the use of a bonding agent or its application method when tested by ISO 9693-1 standard.
尽管铣削钛可用于固定义齿和种植义齿修复的下部结构，但与传统合金相比，饰面瓷的应用存在特殊挑战。为应对这些挑战，一些钛陶瓷系统在不透明层之前使用粘结剂。维他钛瓷粘结剂有粉末、糊剂和喷涂制剂三种形式。我们研究了这三种应用方法对粘结强度的影响。
使用卡瓦珠峰铣削单元和定制设计的铣削刀具路径，从11片二级钛切割而成的薄片中，每片铣削出4根钛棒。一名经验丰富的技术人员制备了25×3×0.5mm³的金属棒，并使用三种应用方法之一涂抹粘结剂，然后按照制造商的说明，在8×3×1mm³的瓷体上涂抹不透明、牙本质和釉质瓷。对照组在涂抹瓷体之前未使用粘结剂。根据ISO 9693-1:2012，使用万能试验机在三点弯曲试验配置下对四组（n = 11）进行粘结强度差异的盲测。
对照组、粉末组、糊剂组和喷涂组的平均（标准差）粘结强度分别为：24.8（2.6）、24.6（2.6）、25.3（4.0）和24.1（3.9）MPa。对所有组进行单因素方差分析和Tukey多重比较检验。各组之间无统计学显著差异（p = 0.951）。
按照ISO 9693-1标准测试时，钛瓷粘结强度不受粘结剂的使用或其应用方法的影响。
